07 May 2022 11:42:23
My pals in America say the glazers are looking for investors for one of there businesses but won't give much away.

They wasn't far of on the cricket agenda.

Could be the recent cricket thing, could be Mufc, suppose well know soon enough.

1.) 07 May 2022
07 May 2022 13:13:29
Could be the Bucs, won the Superbowl with them so what next?

2.) 07 May 2022
07 May 2022 18:19:43
Stadiums in American sports are usually paid for by the City, both the Ray's (baseball) and Bucs (Football) are due a new stadium and the city have been making noises for the last couple of years over it. Each stadium deal is different over who funds it but in essence the teams are quite prepared to walk to a new city who will stump up the hundreds of millions for a state of the art facility.

The Bucs stadium was opened In 98 ish.

In terms of NFL owners the Glazers are well regarded the biggest criticisms being they probably allow their GMs (equivalent to a DoF eith total power over sporting side) too much control and leeway.

Twice under their direction the Bucs built Superbowl winning teams and this year should be in the hunt again.

What's notable is they have had success when the managed to get the right guy in at GM and things fell into place both times around that appointment.

As far as NFL owners go they are certainly less hands on than some and don't tend to be so trigger happy as many.

They have sanctioned massive moves and decisions such ss the Gruden trade (massive draft capital given up for head coach) first superbowl and Brady signing which was about selling Brady a project to give him best chance of another Superbowl.

Personally I never bought into the Anti Glazer hate, them being only in it for the money at all. I never saw that from the NFL team, I believe they want to win and that's their priority. Rather I think they have erroneously believed that to do so required the next SAF, maybe their advisors inside the club believed the same, the irony being the rest of football moved to an NFL style model of HC and coaching staff and GM and player personnel staff as being the model of choice whilst we plowed on looking for the next Fergie or Busby.

If i were to level a criticism of the Glazers its that they were too slow to react and let the people running the show inside the club carry on for too long doing what they were doing.

I see now hints that maybe we moving in a new approach but it's only green shoots and I have no idea whether these guys actually are going to be the ones to return us to the promised land. EtH I have hope in. Murtagh and Arnold I don't know enough about em to judge.

Fletcher, I still can't see wtf his actual job is supposed to be, its seems a bit of a toe dipping here a finger in a pie or two there. maybe should have given the role to Giggs.

3.) 07 May 2022
07 May 2022 19:57:02
Ahem. Jerry Jones.

I think Dallas Cowboys fans would argue very strongly about how owners do get too involved with team matters!

4.) 07 May 2022
07 May 2022 20:03:00
He qas one I was thinking about when saying the Glazers don't. The Kate Al Davis was another.

5.) 07 May 2022
07 May 2022 22:12:55
Oakbark. Over the first 5-6 years of their ownership, the Glazers financed their LBO acquisition of MUFC by using its cash flows to meet interest obligations depriving the club of the capital required to rebuild the squad at the time it was required. The Glazers were also responsible for hiring Woodward to run the club. So while the evolution of the revenue deals negotiated by the EPL, along with increased sponsorship revenues, eventually put United back in the position to spend on transfers again, the club was unable to do so effectively because it was run by amateurs.

There's simply no question that the Glazers have been bad for Man Utd and bad for football, which is why the league is trying to ensure that the new owners of Chelsea do not do the same thing. And to suggest that the Glazers were somehow motivated by something other than money is naive. They have done very well leveraging United's good name and resources to make a great return for themselves. Their investment in the Bucs is now 10X more valuable than the purchase price. The fact that they've made some better management decisions in the US is scarcely relevant to Man Utd fans. Why do you think they'e behind a European Super League? They want to guarantee the income flow of a franchise type system that the EPL and the current European set up does not give them.

The Glazers took a top European club with a great facility, the biggest crowds, worldwide name recognition and destroyed it. Admittedly another owner might have fared no better in the post SAF era, but we don't have a another owner, so as far as I'm concerned they deserve all the opprobrium they receive.