Lower Budget, No Problem
May 9th, 2011
Oh, the agony endured by loads of crumpet munching soccer fans of Team Glazer’s English kickball team. Why those stupid Americans, those frugal franchise destroyers, had cut payroll and were about to humiliate Manchester United with cost-cutting moves and their massive debt before the 2010-2011 season.
These crazy fans were rallying to kick Team Glazer out of the country!
Fast-forward to yesterday, and Team Glazer’s club all but clinched another English Premier League title with their young Mexican star free agent — the same guy fans initially snubbed because he came cheap — scoring a goal to cap his amazing season. In a few weeks, Team Glazer’s kickballers will play in the final of the European championship.
Needless to say Team Glazer has silenced all but the wackiest of the fringe wackos in England, and their club made mountains of cash this season.
What this all has to do with the Bucs, Joe has no clue. But Joe knows there are some X-Files/Twilight Zone/Roswell types who keep close tabs on this stuff.
May 9th, 2011 at 9:09 am
Joe,
Looking forward to some reaction from the NFL Top 100 players. Freeman and Williams are only Bucs on the list and both came in the 80’s. Freeman at 86 and Williams at 83. I guess Donald Penn still gets no love.
May 9th, 2011 at 9:13 am
Donald Penn needs to learn to pass block. I’m not high on him.
May 9th, 2011 at 9:33 am
Erick:
Little surprised at Penn’s absence but not much to say. Kinda speaks for itself.
Skill position players always — always! — will get more love than the big uglies.
May 9th, 2011 at 9:58 am
Little surprised that Freeman is behind Williams on that top 100.
As far Team Glazer and the Man U franchsie, I think it goes to show that those guys are shrewd business men. They generally hire people to run their franchises, that understand that these franchises are businesses, and that there will be cycles of up and downs. The guys running the franchise are in place to ensure the downs are minimized as much as possible, and that the ups are not only sustained, but the maximum goal is reach (championships).
McKay and Dungy were great at minimizing the downs, and sustaining the ups, they just couldn’t hit that pinnacle. Gruden took a team that was a consistent winner and pushed them over the top, but then couldn’t sustain it (although he convinced the Glazers that if Allen were brought in, he could). Hopefully, Dominick and Morris will be able to do both.
The Glazers also understand, that were in the business in the downtimes, you need to minimize costs, which the easiest thing to do is cut player salary. However to sustain the ups, money must be spent (which I think we’ll see more of in the next 2-3 years (maybe not this offseason, if there even is FA), as the contracts for these great rookie classes of ’09 and ’10 start to expire.
I’ve been critical of them the past few years (not as critical as some), but I think there actually is a plan, and it is coming into focus a little bit (the plan worked for Man U).
May 9th, 2011 at 10:10 am
I think you need to check your facts before making wild statements my friend, the reason why people are unhappy with the Glazers is the fact that before the bought the club with borrowed money we where the riches soccer team in the world, now were in massive debt and crippled with debt repayment.
You think the Glazers had anything to do with the success this year then your wrong again, it was due to the manager he is a legend might be the greatest of all time and he got the team to where they are today, coupled with the fact that the teams around them choked.
Also the FREE AGENT wasnt a free agent he cost 6 million pounds which could raise to more when appearances and so on, he was also looked on by the fans as great future star but he has come on faster then expected, and again the glazers didnt get him they probably never heard of him it was the managment and coaching stuff that got him…
I personally dont have a problem with the Glazers owning us as they let the manager do the job and dont get involved with the game side, the major issue is the debt were are now in due to the takeover, which if we have a poor season and dont make the major competitions could cripple the club
May 9th, 2011 at 12:35 pm
Will says = Thomas2.2 inches.
May 9th, 2011 at 12:41 pm
nice touch with the cigarette smoking man.
May 9th, 2011 at 12:50 pm
Thomas 2.2 inches?
May 9th, 2011 at 12:51 pm
In your face, Thomas 2.2 😉
May 9th, 2011 at 3:15 pm
The Glazers have proven that the new approach for years to come in the major sports leagues around the world is going to be VALUE. As a small business owner I highly respect the Glazers as well as Mark Dominik, as their operating philosophy of “value” allows them to maximize return and minimize investment in all areas. That’s what successful business is all about. Cheap owners have both minimal investment AND minimal return (think Mike Brown in Cincinnati). Extravagant owners have maximum investment and inconsistent return (think Jerry Jones). Stupid owners have maximum investment and minimal return (think Daniel Snyder or Al Davis). Smart owners are the new breed such as the Glazers.
May 9th, 2011 at 6:41 pm
@Will says
I suspect it’s you that needs to check your facts. The debt stands at about $720 million which sounds like a lot until you realize that the club is currently valued at $1.84 billion (Forbes 2011). The interest is about $63 million a year. Under the Glazers the clubs revenues have grown from $250m to $450m a year (80% increase) and the operating income from $90m to $160m (estimated for the 2010-2011 season). They’ve spent $350m on player registrations (that’s how players are traded) in their 5 1/2 years – compares with $235m in the prior 5 years. They are not exactly crippled. You are right on the Glazers’ management style – they allow the management team to run the club without interference – much like the Bucs so far as one can see. The Glazers’ six years of ownership is the most successful six year period in the club’s history. Of course much is due to the management team and particularly the club’s manager (think Head Coach). However it’s worth remembering that the manager, Sir Alex Ferguson, is just completing his 25th year in charge at the club. If the Glazers were damaging the club you would expect the team’s performance to decline rather than improve given that the management input has not changed.
May 10th, 2011 at 12:16 am
Joe here,
@Ravelston — Well said.
@Will — you’re not familiar with what a free agent is on this side of the Atlantic?
May 10th, 2011 at 12:50 am
Joe
In football (as opposed to ‘throwball’) there is the possibility of players becoming ‘free agents’ – i.e. able to negotiate with other clubs – at the ends of their contracts (that’s how Beckham moved from Real Madrid to the Galaxy). Their previous team typically gets no compensation. More commonly players are sold with one or more years remaining on their contracts if either their current team isn’t going to offer a contract extension or they feel the player wouldn’t accept an extension (that’s why Ronaldo was sold to Real Madrid – he’d made it clear that he wasn’t going to accept a contract extension at Manchester United). The transaction terminates the player’s contract with the selling club – a new contract is negotiated with the buying club. The player typically gets 10% of the transfer fee. (NB A player cannot be sold against his will.) Chicharito was still under contract to Guadalajara so there’s no way he could be described as a ‘free agent’.
May 10th, 2011 at 3:08 am
I get your points Ravelston, and as i said above i have no problem with the glazers, its just that with the debt hanging over us it is always leaving a black cloud over the club.
You have to remember Ferguson is a great manager and strong with it comes to decision he is the club really, what if the next manager isnt as strong, and we have 1-2 bad seasons, those profits you mentioned at based on success on the field, making the European Champions League.
Look at Liverpool until the were recently bought over, they only had a fraction of the debt that Man United has and because of 2 poor seasons they almost went into administration. We have also refinanced are stadium to help relieve the interest on the debt. It is things like this that have fans upset. Also remember that United sold Ronaldo for around $100m dollars and that really hasnt been reinvested in the team. But hopefully this summer, as we need to refresh the team. I know that sound wierd being the League champions and in the final of the cup but its universally agreed its the weakest team in a long team and its more due to the teams around them crashing and burning
As i said i like what the glazers have done apart from the debt i do think there good owners, i just wanted to point out the reason why there is opposition to them from supporters
May 10th, 2011 at 7:57 am
Joe here,
@Will – NFL players “out of contract” as you would call it, are pursued by teams in the NFL offseason, equivalent to the transfer period overseas, minus the cash payoff to the guy’s former club.
The analogy here is that premier league teams, like NFL teams, finish their season, determine a budget and needs, and then go shopping. Around here we call that picking up free agents, because players and draft picks aren’t given up for the new player — the only compensation is money.
Man. U. scouted Hernandez, and they bought him … because he was for sale. The end result is what free agency is to an NFL team.
Please don’t assume Joe doesn’t know what he’s talking about when it comes to soccer. You’d be wrong.
May 10th, 2011 at 11:14 am
@Will
I understand your concerns but I think that in the main they are unfounded. The stadium refinancing is a myth – the debt covenants allow for the sale and lease-back of both Old Trafford and the Carrington facility but it has not taken place and is not likely to. The “ronaldo money” is interesting. In the last two completed financial years (which cover the transaction) United made £113m from the sale of players. In the same two years we spent £99.5m. In the first half of this financial year our net spend is £11.8m. If you do the math, our net profit on transfers over the period is £1.7m – we actually have spent the Ronaldo money. (It’s not all smoke and mirrors. The Berbatov purchase and the Ronaldo sale happened in the same financial year and there were stage payments on other transactions made in that year also.) We could argue that no “new” money was spent on transfers – true – so hopefully the £130m or so in the bank really is a war chest for the summer. Having said all that, I don’t actually agree that this is our weakest team for a long time. You only have to look at 2002-05 to find much weaker teams. And, as they say, the proof of the pudding is in the eating – weak teams don’t win the Premiership and get to the final of the CL.
May 10th, 2011 at 5:56 pm
One of the main points here that I think will might be trying to make is that you quoted united as being on debt by 720m, but is valued @ 1.82b, paying 62m a year. If there had been no Glazers at united the club would still be worth that, maybe more when you add the 300m so far given away in interest, they would not owe the 720m, and wouldn’t be losing 60m odd a yr in payments. So for the pleasure of being owned by the Glazers, who also extract tens of millions as fees through their red football ventured, how can you actually call this successful. I also agree that this is whilst not the worst united team, its also far from the best. The midfield is very weak, & regularly gets outstrengthened by the premierleagues top teams. I think the evidence that quite a few agree is in the fact that the season ticket waiting list gas evaporated, & there are a lot of games now not sold out, unheard of for god knows how many years. People do not like being asked to continually pay out more, yet see less & less be put back into the team.