placidcasual Posted 1 December 2006 Posted 1 December 2006 As I understand it it's not a million miles away from the NBA NHL etc etc in it's working. Even more than I first thought if this is the case with the players. I always thought it was Columbus who sold Mcbride to Fulham as thats how it was reported over here. I know its all very complex. Except in the NBA etc the teams hold the contracts not the league. I don't think that the UK press would realise that MLS held the contracts rather than the teams. Currently there is no youth system either, the College players enter the league by way of a draft - just like the other leagues. However that is changing shortly.
Manwell Pablo Posted 1 December 2006 Posted 1 December 2006 Manwell, that is shocking You have ruined my basking. Good, will teach you to bask at my expense..
Chandler Posted 1 December 2006 Author Posted 1 December 2006 Chimp, you are right, I do put myself above everybody. I do so because I am simply the best at this game and people like you need to be reminded of that fact - constantly. But enough of my false modesty... Swiss Fox, you get on my nerves with your neo Freudian psychobabble. But I can see through your feeble heuristic device, muesli-face! But you don't need me to tell you which way the wind is blowing. It's just a coincidence is it, that Yanks are looking to buy debt ridden football clubs at fancy prices at exactly the same time as the Beckham rule comes into force in the US? It's just a coincidence is it that UEFA criticises foreign interest in English clubs at exactly the same time that this rule is passed? And it's a coincidence is it that MM (both an American citizen and former American football club owner) makes a formal approach for LCFC within weeks of this rule being approved? Next you'll say the fact that the Beckham rule has been passed and that he has still not signed a new contract at Real Madrid is just a pure coincidence. Personally, I'd rather be a conspiracy theorist than a coincidence theorist. I'd rather not be dumb...
Manwell Pablo Posted 1 December 2006 Posted 1 December 2006 Chimp, you are right, I do put myself above everybody. I do so because I am simply the best at this game and people like you need to be reminded of that fact - constantly. But enough of my false modesty... Swiss Fox, you get on my nerves with your neo Freudian psychobabble. But I can see through your feeble heuristic device, muesli-face! But you don't need me to tell you which way the wind is blowing. It's just a coincidence is it, that Yanks are looking to buy debt ridden football clubs at fancy prices at exactly the same time as the Beckham rule comes into force in the US? It's just a coincidence is it that UEFA criticises foreign interest in English clubs at exactly the same time that this rule is passed? And it's a coincidence is it that MM (both an American citizen and former American football club owner) makes a formal approach for LCFC within weeks of this rule being approved? Next you'll say the fact that the Becham rule has been passed and that he has still not signed a new contract at Real Madrid is just a pure coincidence. Personally, I'd rather be a conspiracy theorist than a coincidence theorist. I'd rather not be dumb... What rules that? All players must protect themselves from cold and flu viruses at all times?
Babylon Posted 1 December 2006 Posted 1 December 2006 Whats rules that? All players must protect themselves from cold and flu viruses at all times? Reply of the year.
Chimp Posted 1 December 2006 Posted 1 December 2006 Chimp, you are right, I do put myself above everybody. I do so because I am simply the best at this game and people like you need to be reminded of that fact - constantly. But enough of my false modesty... [..] Sigh, this is why you'll never be taken seriously Chandler. How much credibility can anyone put in a person that constantly uses an internet forum as a crutch to bolster their low self-esteem? Please, just drop the posturing and baiting, it's entirely too obvious to be used by anyone who purports to have a modicum of confidence and intelligence. Also, I note you didn't answer my questions. Pity, I wanted to hear your reasoning.
Jon the Hat Posted 1 December 2006 Posted 1 December 2006 Sigh, this is why you'll never be taken seriously Chandler. How much credibility can anyone put in a person that constantly uses an internet forum as a crutch to bolster their low self-esteem? Please, just drop the posturing and baiting, it's entirely too obvious to be used by anyone who purports to have a modicum of confidence and intelligence. Also, I note you didn't answer my questions. Pity, I wanted to hear your reasoning. Reasoning... Yeah, good one.
MC Prussian Posted 1 December 2006 Posted 1 December 2006 Chimp, you are right, I do put myself above everybody. I do so because I am simply the best at this game and people like you need to be reminded of that fact - constantly. But enough of my false modesty... Swiss Fox, you get on my nerves with your neo Freudian psychobabble. But I can see through your feeble heuristic device, muesli-face! But you don't need me to tell you which way the wind is blowing. That's right, gimme a right handful of your "I'm the best attitude" and smack it in my face! Btw, your nerves must be real down when you start calling others "Muesli-face"! :laugh: I actually find this one word quite amusing. Keep 'em coming! It's just a coincidence is it, that Yanks are looking to buy debt ridden football clubs at fancy prices at exactly the same time as the Beckham rule comes into force in the US? Does this mean you got something against Americans? What other "Yanks" are buying what other "debt-ridden" football clubs exactly? Examples? Sources? Pompey is now in the hands of a Frenchman, West Ham bought by an Icelandic. Chelski is Chelski and only Villa and ManU in the hands of Americans. As for Mandaric, I can certainly repeat that so far, he's never been into anything related to what you call "Franchising" in terms of football. St. Louis Storm, San José Earthquake, Standard, Nice, Pompey, NK Koper: Apart from the unsuccessful American soccer teams St. Louis and San José, the other teams all still exist (in parts thanks to Mandaric). It's just a coincidence is it that UEFA criticises foreign interest in English clubs at exactly the same time that this rule is passed? And it's a coincidence is it that MM (both an American citizen and former American football club owner) makes a formal approach for LCFC within weeks of this rule being approved? Again, I don't quite see the connection there. Foreign investors had been able to buy European clubs long before the "Beckham rule" for the MLS was passed. In fact, Mandaric made his first bid BEFORE that rule went through. Next you'll say the fact that the Beckham rule has been passed and that he has still not signed a new contract at Real Madrid is just a pure coincidence. Personally, I'd rather be a conspiracy theorist than a coincidence theorist. Beckham is Beckham, Real Madrid is Real Madrid. What should I care about them two? I'm neither a fan of the one nor the other. I'd rather not be dumb... But you realize that your argumentation makes you look that way, do you?
Manwell Pablo Posted 1 December 2006 Posted 1 December 2006 Standerd Liege and Nice still exist thanks to Mandaric? I think not.
MC Prussian Posted 1 December 2006 Posted 1 December 2006 Standerd Liege and Nice still exist thanks to Mandaraic? I think not. My bad, I apologize for that. Standard Liege is a Ltd. since 1988 and Mandaric did not have any impact on the organisation. They neither won the league title, nor a cup during his spell there. Same goes for Nice. His financial success with those two clubs was next to nothing, because he sold both clubs shortly after acquiring them.
Joe. Posted 1 December 2006 Posted 1 December 2006 dont usually read the long threads as i get bored but i was intrigued with this one Yeah same here, I thought that was brilliant. We could have all sorts of links when Milan finally arrives. An American leicester equivalent eh?
Head Honcho Posted 1 December 2006 Posted 1 December 2006 Fantastic Read. Thank you very much indeed. A few questions though ? why would MM take the risk of buying Leicester, who at present are in a pretty dismal position ? Risk paying out on a large number of new players to get us into the Prem ? to then pay out more to get us solidated ? Point being, why does he just buy someone like Charlton, or even stay at Pompey ? Just doesnt make sense ! Simple answer to that is money! His initial investment at Charlton would be well in excess of £30 million and the trouble with Pompey is ground! Despite MM's best efforts the local council are still hampering any development of Fratton Park.
Chandler Posted 1 December 2006 Author Posted 1 December 2006 Swiss Fox you are ten times more irritating than I am and not even half as intelligent. By attempting to deflect attention away from my central points about concidence by accusing me of being an Amerophobe and by your delaration of disinterest in Beckham and Real Madrid you show you are only interested in playing to the ****** in the gallery. As for Chimp's question on the groundshare THAT IS A DEFINITE RUNNER. If and when Milan is installed talks on that will recommence early next year. The whole business about 'primacy of tenure' was a scheme hatched by one of the LFC directors who went behind the backs of the LFC board to get a ruling from the RFU to torpedo the groundshare. Now the eggchasers are having trouble coming up with the £25 million it will cost to increase the capacity at Welford Road. Needles to say you won't be happy with that...
Jon the Hat Posted 1 December 2006 Posted 1 December 2006 Swiss Fox you are ten times more irritating than I am and not even half as intelligent. By attempting to deflect attention away from my central points about concidence by accusing me of being an Amerophobe and by your delaration of disinterest in Beckham and Real Madrid you show you are only interested in playing to the ****** in the gallery. As for Chimp's question, on the groundshare THAT IS A DEFINITE RUNNER. If and when Milan is installed talks on that will recommence early next year. The whole business about 'primacy of tenure' was a scheme hatched by one of the LFC directors who went behind the backs of the LFC board to get a ruling from the RFU to torpedo the groundshare. Now the eggchasers are having trouble coming up with the £25 million it will cost to increase the capacity at Welford Road. Needles to say you won't be happy with that... I think a groundshare is a great idea, as long as it is on equal terms. So far it hasn't been, but with MM in charge it most likely would be. No problem there. I think the fact that Swissfox hasn't been censored too much negates your argument about who is the most irritating. Troll off somewhere else.
Webbo Posted 1 December 2006 Posted 1 December 2006 Sometime ago I tried to post on this board and give the real reasons why MM wanted to take over LCFC. I was actively prevented from doing so by one of the moderators more concerned with his own ego than with board members knowing the truth. So I am going to try again... Lets get the trivial ones out of the way first: 1) Premiership football could be secured for a very modest outlay on the never never for an inital return of £50 million excluding receipts and merchandising ( a 1000% profit on investment). 2) A revival of the 'merger' with the Tigers would facilitate the reacquisition of The Walkers (and expansion) and slash administration and marketing costs. But these are not the REAL reasons. Some of you may know that MM once owned an MLS outfit called San Jose Earthquakes. Well, word on the street is that he wants to own another MLS club. Malcolm Glazer wants one too and so does Randy Lerner. In fact both these Americans bought into Premiership clubs first so that they could then go back and buy in the States. Why do they want to do that. The answer is... FRANCHISING At the moment Glazer is looking to buy one of the four MLS clubs owned by Philip Anschutz's entertainment conglomerate AEG who in turn is key to make at least one disposal following the introduction of the so called 'Beckham' rule which now allows MLS clubs the right to have two players on their 'rosters' whose salaries are not capped. This rule was introduced to facilitate the possible move to MLS of one David Beckham. It looks almost certain that he will be going to LA Galaxy at the end of this season and that the club will be taken over by Malcolm Glazer and be rebranded as 'Manchester United USA.' Colossal TV and merchandising revenues will then be used to pay off loans taken out to finance the purchase of MUFC. This my friends is FACT check here: http://www.bizjournals.com/tampabay/storie...27/daily33.html Now my spies in the US tell me that MM has been seen both at DC United this season (home of the not so young Freddy Adu and another AEG club) and at New York Red Bulls (yet another AEG outfit and to where David Beckham was first mooted as moving) and that he had expressed interest in getting 'involved' once the Beckham Rule had passed. If all this does come to pass by 2008/9 we will have a 'twin club' in Washington or New York with the word 'Foxes' in the title and whose players will take the field in the holy blue. Too much isn't it? Back of the envelope calculations show that whole franchise revenues by 2010 will be inexcess of £150 million per annum - second only to MUFC (yes, more than Chelsea) and enough to launch a Premiersip title bid. And enough to make Milan a billionaire by the time he pops his clogs... fascinating theory, but much as i love my club putting foxes in an american team wil do nothing to enhance its value, americans have never heard of us. i was wearing my leicester shirt in florida last and everyone thought i was a chelsea fan.
MC Prussian Posted 1 December 2006 Posted 1 December 2006 Swiss Fox you are ten times more irritating than I am and not even half as intelligent. By attempting to deflect attention away from my central points about concidence by accusing me of being an Amerophobe and by your delaration of disinterest in Beckham and Real Madrid you show you are only interested in playing to the ****** in the gallery. As for Chimp's question on the groundshare THAT IS A DEFINITE RUNNER. If and when Milan is installed talks on that will recommence early next year. The whole business about 'primacy of tenure' was a scheme hatched by one of the LFC directors who went behind the backs of the LFC board to get a ruling from the RFU to torpedo the groundshare. Now the eggchasers are having trouble coming up with the £25 million it will cost to increase the capacity at Welford Road. Needles to say you won't be happy with that... I'm in no way trying to deflect from your topic. My main concern with your argumentation is that I don't see the connections where you do see 'em. As I've said before, Mandaric's first bid for our club came in before the "Beckham rule" was approved. About that "intelligence thing": You must be able to mind-read at a very large distance then, eh? Your superpowers do sincerely impress me... This is mainly a Leicester City forum. Please explain to me what Beckham and Real Madrid have in common with us apart from football maybe? In any case, you'd better be off in the General Section then.
Daggers Posted 1 December 2006 Posted 1 December 2006 Swiss Fox you are... There you go Chandler, three more to add to the ones you keep displaying to everyone
Chandler Posted 1 December 2006 Author Posted 1 December 2006 I'm in no way trying to deflect from your topic. My main concern with your argumentation is that I don't see the connections where you do see 'em. As I've said before, Mandaric's first bid for our club came in before the "Beckham rule" was approved. About that "intelligence thing": You must be able to mind-read at a very large distance then, eh? Your superpowers do sincerely impress me... This is mainly a Leicester City forum. Please explain to me what Beckham and Real Madrid have in common with us apart from football maybe? In any case, you'd better be off in the General Section then. 1) Would help if you read rather scanned my posts. I stated that his initial approach was made within weeks of the Beckham Rule being passed. But he already knew it was going through. It would have been more sensible for him to make his approach much earlier in the season. 2) DO I HAVE TO SPELL THINGS OUT TO YOU IN BOLD CAPS? Beckham's decision not to sign a new contract at Real Madrid was the green light for the Beckham Rule. Without Beckhams Rule MM would not have made an offer for Leicester. Ergo, Beckhams situation at Real is directly affecting the future of LCFC. When you come up with a thread that attracts half as much attention as this one Swiss Fox then you can tell me to bog off to the General Section. And if you really are as bored as you claim to be by my scoop why are you still on this thread?
BartonFox Posted 1 December 2006 Posted 1 December 2006 I did realise FoxesTalk had taken over the licence for Jackanory from the BBC. Fair play to whoever brokered that deal
AlbertFox Posted 1 December 2006 Posted 1 December 2006 Swiss Fox you are ten times more irritating than I am and not even half as intelligent. By attempting to deflect attention away from my central points about concidence by accusing me of being an Amerophobe and by your delaration of disinterest in Beckham and Real Madrid you show you are only interested in playing to the ****** in the gallery. As for Chimp's question on the groundshare THAT IS A DEFINITE RUNNER. If and when Milan is installed talks on that will recommence early next year. The whole business about 'primacy of tenure' was a scheme hatched by one of the LFC directors who went behind the backs of the LFC board to get a ruling from the RFU to torpedo the groundshare. Now the eggchasers are having trouble coming up with the £25 million it will cost to increase the capacity at Welford Road. Needles to say you won't be happy with that... OK, so I was really....really.....bored at work a couple of weeks ago, around the time when the Trust were e-mailing their members for opinions on ground sharing, and I and e-mailed the Football league to see what their stance was on ground sharing. This was their reply..... We are in receipt of your communication. We cannot however comment on matters involving other clubs as these are private contractual matters between the clubs concerned, the rugby clubs with whom they share grounds and The Football League. Football League Regulation 13.5, introduced in Season 2005/6, state "Except where a Club seeks consent to enter into a ground-sharing agreement with another Club, it shall be a condition of any such consent that the ground-sharing agreement shall contain provision to ensure that the playing of any of the Club's first team matches will always take precedence over the activities of the other party to the agreement." Typical legal wording, but if I understand it correctly, the FL will only allow ground sharing if the other party (the Tigers) agree to move their fixtures every time there is a clash. How likely is it that the RFU will allow that when the Tigers have already got their own ground?
fox123 Posted 1 December 2006 Posted 1 December 2006 1) Would help if you read rather scanned my posts. I stated that his initial approach was made within weeks of the Beckham Rule being passed. But he already knew it was going through. It would have been more sensible for him to make his approach much earlier in the season. 2) DO I HAVE TO SPELL THINGS OUT TO YOU IN BOLD CAPS? Beckham's decision not to sign a new contract at Real Madrid was the green light for the Beckham Rule. Without Beckhams Rule MM would not have made an offer for Leicester. Ergo, Beckhams situation at Real is directly affecting the future of LCFC. When you come up with a thread that attracts half as much attention as this one Swiss Fox then you can tell me to bog off to the General Section. And if you really are as bored as you claim to be by my scoop why are you still on this thread? Pick up your phone, and seek immediate medical attention!
Thracian Posted 1 December 2006 Posted 1 December 2006 I've seen an avatar like that somewhere! Are congratulations in order.
Lord Nibblington Posted 1 December 2006 Posted 1 December 2006 Well. The more I read of this thread, the more confident I am in declaring that panto season has indeed arrived on the boards. Yay! Cross dressing for everyone! Erm. Nevermind.
stez Posted 1 December 2006 Posted 1 December 2006 http://www.goal.com/en-us/Articolo.aspx?ContenutoId=180462 That seems to suggest that the link isn't all that. The whole rebranding idea seems based on conjunction and speculation about possible takeovers. I can't say I'm overly convinced. Well. The more I read of this thread, the more confident I am in declaring that panto season has indeed arrived on the boards. Yay! Cross dressing for everyone! Erm. Nevermind. you'll find, if THE LEGEND THAT IS CHANDLER ( ) sticks round, that he doesn't like answering difficult questions, such as my request to prove that he was once a big noise in the LCFC boardroom. that remains unproven.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.