PackerFan71
Life on the Edge
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2012
- Messages
- 3,153
- Reaction score
- 400
They are investors and because of this they are not interested in reducing the debt, they want increase their return on investment.
You and me, PackerFan71, have the same view on this, but I think most US fans propably can't understand why we are against investors like the Glazers because professional sport in the US is based on this system. (with one exception we all know ! )
Could you imagine to move Chelsea from London to....let's say....Liverpool just because there could be a (better) market for a third team based in Liverpool ?
However - the EPL is a cash cow, the highest salaries are paid in the EPL, the clubs need fresh money and thats why all the Glazers, Hicks and Gillet, or NESV had the chance to takeover EPL-clubs.
All these example prove that we have to protect our 50+1 rule as long as we can !
Exactly that would never happen here, the plain fact is it would never work fans have a different mentality, the franchise idea is totally alien to them. I did hear a story this week about the Packers in relation to this. Just after WWII the Packers were in deep trouble financially and Curly Lambeau proposed a franchise move to San Francisco of all places!!. Thankfully because of the way the Packers were setup this was rejected by the organisation. A share issue was set up and the Pack retained ther home in Green Bay. The Pack definatley have the most similar fan mentality and vibe to European soccer fans no question about it.
The way things are going the EPL eventually will eat itself, unless there is some kind of control over spending in relation to income.