PDA

View Full Version : Screamer: Fans Righteously Pissed At Realizing NYCFC Is A Glorified Farm Team



Cashcleaner
01-05-2015, 06:06 PM
Gotta love the headlines that Gawker media sites are renown for. :D


The strange Frank Lampard/NYCFC/Manchester City love triangle always felt like it was going to end in a bit of a train wreck, with Lampard's stay with City set to end this month and the MLS expansion club counting on him to be its face. Well, that train just jumped the tracks: Lampard is staying in England, and fans are shocked—shocked!—to discover that the ownership group cares more about the Premier League than MLS.
Buried in a New Year's Eve news dump, City announced (http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/30648173) that it had come to an agreement to extend Lampard's stay with the club through the end of the season. Brought in to shore up City's short-staffed midfield, the former Chelsea player has been much better than many expected, scoring five goals in 15 appearances, 12 of them as a sub. With the likes of Fernando and Fernandinho not playing exceptionally well, and Yaya Touré's impending absence during the Africa Cup of Nations, Lampard, who signed mainly just to stay in shape ahead of the MLS season, has become an important body in the depth chart.

Article continues here: Screamer (http://screamer.deadspin.com/fans-righteously-pissed-at-realizing-nycfc-is-a-glorifi-1677091680)

Wagner
01-05-2015, 06:45 PM
i feel for the fans.
but, did they not kind of see this coming?

RealG-TFC
01-05-2015, 07:22 PM
Are we forgetting that they still have David Villa on their roster? A player who just last year played in a Champions League final and was part of a League winning team.

james
01-05-2015, 10:02 PM
I would love a team in the CITY proper of NYC like The Bronx but I am still mad MLS let them get a team with only a Baseball Stadium (I don't like the idea of playing in Football stadiums, but Baseball sight-lines are that much worse!!) to play in for an estimated minimum first 3 years (which could really also be 10 years because when the decision was made no real decisions on the stadium location had been made final). Dam of course its all about the money!!!

MLS is also growing to fast, not sticking to its Soccer Specific Stadium plans and really just grabbing all the money they can as fast as they can, but this could be a bad thing in say 10 or 15 years when the franchise money is all dried up. So no I am surprised about the new NYC team, they are money loaded farm team of Man City.

brad
01-05-2015, 10:08 PM
^^ I don't blame the league. They've brought a recognized brand to the league and two major stars (well one for sure, who knows about two) - into the biggest market in the US. That has the potential to help the growth of the league.

Redcoe15
01-05-2015, 11:59 PM
I can blame the league for this. They wanted a second team in New York in the worst way possible, and they got it. NYCFC is just a brand extension of the other Manchester club with the stench of a farm system by their handling of Lampard. Add to it that there may not be anything regarding a new stadium of their own in the foreseeable future and they're going to be looked at laughably by the vicious New York media, which will make MLS look like huge dopes for bringing them in.

jabbronies
01-06-2015, 12:04 AM
Are we forgetting that they still have David Villa on their roster? A player who just last year played in a Champions League final and was part of a League winning team.

this

ensco
01-06-2015, 07:02 AM
There is a high likelihood of a lockout or strike. Any other decision would have been nonsensical.

Fort York Redcoat
01-06-2015, 08:17 AM
There is a high likelihood of a lockout or strike. Any other decision would have been nonsensical.

I think it more nonsensical to expect this action to be tolerated without complaint.

ensco
01-06-2015, 08:23 AM
Things have changed since he was signed.

The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.

Damien
01-06-2015, 09:22 AM
Chivas USA: The Sequel

Joe Kool
01-06-2015, 09:33 AM
Just wait until NYCFC loan David Villa to Man City....

Canary10
01-06-2015, 09:34 AM
In a way it's actually worse than a farm team. It's really just their way of getting around financial fair play rules. They centralize a number of expenses across all the teams they own instead of having to attribute them to Man City. I think Garber is way above his head on this one.

PopePouri
01-06-2015, 09:45 AM
Clicked article...saw Billy Haisley...Close window.

brad
01-06-2015, 10:25 AM
In a way it's actually worse than a farm team. It's really just their way of getting around financial fair play rules. They centralize a number of expenses across all the teams they own instead of having to attribute them to Man City. I think Garber is way above his head on this one.

Garber needs to grow a pair. If NYCFC sign a player, MLS owns the contract. They have central control, if things aren't above board at the time of signing, fix it or block it. In a case like Lampard's, if he is a player in the MLS, Garber has the ability to say no to extending the loan, and Frank has to come back. Unless, of course Lampard was actually a loan from City (if that's the case, learn from it and don't allow that again)

Now, that said, it's possible City have found a loophole which they have exploited (the Camilo transfer highlighting the potential for exploiting the rules). If so, it's up to the MLS to close the loophole. More likely though, Garber is bending over backwards - rich owners, a highly recognizable brand, and big name players in NYC.

However, I do tend to give Garber the benefit of the doubt. He's done a lot of questionable things since I've been following the league, but he has done a great job in growing the league in the time I have been following it

Canary10
01-06-2015, 10:49 AM
Garber needs to grow a pair. If NYCFC sign a player, MLS owns the contract. They have central control, if things aren't above board at the time of signing, fix it or block it. In a case like Lampard's, if he is a player in the MLS, Garber has the ability to say no to extending the loan, and Frank has to come back. Unless, of course Lampard was actually a loan from City (if that's the case, learn from it and don't allow that again)

Now, that said, it's possible City have found a loophole which they have exploited (the Camilo transfer highlighting the potential for exploiting the rules). If so, it's up to the MLS to close the loophole. More likely though, Garber is bending over backwards - rich owners, a highly recognizable brand, and big name players in NYC.

However, I do tend to give Garber the benefit of the doubt. He's done a lot of questionable things since I've been following the league, but he has done a great job in growing the league in the time I have been following it

MLS never signed him.

This (http://www.forbes.com/sites/bobbymcmahon/2015/01/04/for-nycfc-ticket-buyers-the-lampard-debacle-is-personal-for-manchester-city-owners-it-is-simply-business/) is a good article talking about what City's owners are up to, particularly this:

"The Manchester City payroll stats show a significant decrease in the number of staff but at the same time external charges have increased by $26M to $90M in 2013/14.
It appears that many scouting and related expenses have been moved off the Manchester City payroll and on to the books of the holding company only to then to be pro-rated back to each of the four clubs in the form of recharges."

It's really naive of Garber to think City Football Group and MLS's interests are at all aligned.

ensco
01-06-2015, 11:14 AM
MLS never signed him.

This (http://www.forbes.com/sites/bobbymcmahon/2015/01/04/for-nycfc-ticket-buyers-the-lampard-debacle-is-personal-for-manchester-city-owners-it-is-simply-business/) is a good article talking about what City's owners are up to, particularly this:

"The Manchester City payroll stats show a significant decrease in the number of staff but at the same time external charges have increased by $26M to $90M in 2013/14.
It appears that many scouting and related expenses have been moved off the Manchester City payroll and on to the books of the holding company only to then to be pro-rated back to each of the four clubs in the form of recharges."

It's really naive of Garber to think City Football Group and MLS's interests are at all aligned.

This is all there is to say.

The more MLS try to sign players like Defoe and Lampard, the less control they will have.

Gnashing of teeth is pointless.

brad
01-06-2015, 11:52 AM
MLS never signed him.

This (http://www.forbes.com/sites/bobbymcmahon/2015/01/04/for-nycfc-ticket-buyers-the-lampard-debacle-is-personal-for-manchester-city-owners-it-is-simply-business/) is a good article talking about what City's owners are up to, particularly this:

"The Manchester City payroll stats show a significant decrease in the number of staff but at the same time external charges have increased by $26M to $90M in 2013/14.
It appears that many scouting and related expenses have been moved off the Manchester City payroll and on to the books of the holding company only to then to be pro-rated back to each of the four clubs in the form of recharges."

It's really naive of Garber to think City Football Group and MLS's interests are at all aligned.

Interesting tidbit - but that doesn't say anything specifically about Lampard. Has there been other info saying that Lampard was signed to Man City, with the initial intent (maybe) of moving him to the MLS in January?

If that's the case, and the league/team marketed him to sell tickets based on the trust that it would happen, well yeah....

Super
01-06-2015, 11:53 AM
So they spend $100 mil to join the league only to ruin their brand before day one. Well done. idiots!

brad
01-06-2015, 11:55 AM
This is all there is to say.

The more MLS try to sign players like Defoe and Lampard, the less control they will have.

Gnashing of teeth is pointless.

To an extent, I agree. With Lampard though, i think it's more to do with the fact that they got in bed with very rich owners whose primary interests are the success of a foreign team over their MLS franchise. And from there perspective, it makes a lot of sense. The amount of money they stand to make off NYCFC is likely peanuts compared to what a deep run in the CL will net them.

brad
01-06-2015, 12:09 PM
So they spend $100 mil to join the league only to ruin their brand before day one. Well done. idiots!

Do they care? It has no impact on the perception of Man City. The rub is we are all looking at this from the perspective within the MLS (which is understandable). This is really about the whole picture in which the success of Manchester City trumps all.

Legit question - how much does NYCFC stand to make annually compared to how much MCFC stand to make annually? How about this year? City are thin in the midfield right now (players under-performing and Toure heading to the AFC). Lampard is nailing for them this year, and they most likey, and rightfully think that he will play a big role in a deeper run in the CL and pushing for retaining the EPL title. Both of which have huge amounts of money attached to it.

If they can circumvent the Fair Play rules through this and make City more competitive as a result, that translates into more $$$ overall. They would likely be out of the CL without Lampard right now.

brad
01-06-2015, 12:11 PM
I'll also add - the Shieks operate at a very different level - both financially and priority wise than most other rich people. City is very likely a rich persons pissing contest more than an actual profit vehicle.

Brooker
01-06-2015, 12:36 PM
This league is such a clusterfuck. I can't even explain it to people when they ask. lol

Canary10
01-06-2015, 12:50 PM
Interesting tidbit - but that doesn't say anything specifically about Lampard. Has there been other info saying that Lampard was signed to Man City, with the initial intent (maybe) of moving him to the MLS in January?

If that's the case, and the league/team marketed him to sell tickets based on the trust that it would happen, well yeah....

My comments were more general about NYCFC, not so much about Lampard specifically. My understanding though is that Lampard was signed to the parent group (City Football Group) with the intent of playing for New York. He was never actually signed to MLS, as is the protocol for every other player. I read somewhere he didn't show up on the MLSPU's final release of salary info, which should have been the tip off that something was funny. I guess MLS was going by trust that he would actually play for New York? Raises a lot of questions. How could even play for an MLS team if MLS didn't own that contract as they do everyone else? Was the contract going to revert to MLS once he began playing? And if MLS never owned the contract, it's clear pretty much every statement they've made about Lampard being in MLS was at best hopeful, and at worst a misrepresentation.

brad
01-06-2015, 02:46 PM
My comments were more general about NYCFC, not so much about Lampard specifically. My understanding though is that Lampard was signed to the parent group (City Football Group) with the intent of playing for New York. He was never actually signed to MLS, as is the protocol for every other player. I read somewhere he didn't show up on the MLSPU's final release of salary info, which should have been the tip off that something was funny. I guess MLS was going by trust that he would actually play for New York? Raises a lot of questions. How could even play for an MLS team if MLS didn't own that contract as they do everyone else? Was the contract going to revert to MLS once he began playing? And if MLS never owned the contract, it's clear pretty much every statement they've made about Lampard being in MLS was at best hopeful, and at worst a misrepresentation.

You are 100% correct. Here's an article by Wahl with direct comments from Garber:
http://www.si.com/planet-futbol/2015/01/04/mls-commissioner-don-garber-frank-lampard-steven-gerrard-july-2015

Sounds to me there was a handshake deal for him to start the season in the MLS. With his performances so far, Toure going to the other African cup of nations, and the other midfielders kind of stinking - they obviously backed out.

jloome
01-06-2015, 03:39 PM
You are 100% correct. Here's an article by Wahl with direct comments from Garber:
http://www.si.com/planet-futbol/2015/01/04/mls-commissioner-don-garber-frank-lampard-steven-gerrard-july-2015

Sounds to me there was a handshake deal for him to start the season in the MLS. With his performances so far, Toure going to the other African cup of nations, and the other midfielders kind of stinking - they obviously backed out.

Plus, it suggests the league was going to allow the city group to skirt the mls contract regs, which could open them to an anti-trust suit by the players' union.

ensco
01-06-2015, 04:13 PM
Plus, it suggests the league was going to allow the city group to skirt the mls contract regs, which could open them to an anti-trust suit by the players' union.

Great point, and perhaps not coincidentally, this isn't a risk they'll be running now, as he ain't coming until after a deal is done.

WestStandGeoff
01-06-2015, 04:31 PM
I'll also add - the Shieks operate at a very different level - both financially and priority wise than most other rich people. City is very likely a rich persons pissing contest more than an actual profit vehicle.

Close, but not exactly. Has a lot to do with branding... you'll notice every team they own has Etihad as a shirt sponsor.

Canary10
01-06-2015, 04:34 PM
Great point, and perhaps not coincidentally, this isn't a risk they'll be running now, as he ain't coming until after a deal is done.

I'd be interested in knowing if he was going to be allowed to play with his contract owned by City Football Group and not MLS. Or was MLS going to own it when the season started. Because if the former that would be a totally new situation in MLS.

brad
01-06-2015, 07:21 PM
I'd be interested in knowing if he was going to be allowed to play with his contract owned by City Football Group and not MLS. Or was MLS going to own it when the season started. Because if the former that would be a totally new situation in MLS.

I suspect that the initial intent was to transfer him in January. I suspect they expected Frank to play a smaller role than he has.

Since then he has had a much bigger impact than expected and obviously they want to keep him.

The question is why not actually sign him to NYCFC initially and loan him back to MCFC. This would allow them to bury his whole salary in the MLS. He could play for MCFC for 50 quid a week and have no hit on the financial fair play stuff.

Intitially I as thinking this was so that MCFC would be in the driving seat in case they decided they did want to keep him.

But I wonder. Is there anything preventing MCFC from charging NYCFC a transfer fee for him? Effectively it's just shifting cash around the same company - but if they could if they could sell him on that would really help them out with the FairPlay stuff. I think UEFA have rules against this - but not 100% sure.

dutch
01-23-2015, 12:46 AM
Well it looks like he's been injured and will not play for anybody at the moment lmao. Hip injury vs hamburger sv, and Man city say he should be able to play against chelsea but I dont see it.
I see both sides of this Garber vs MCFC coming full speed like a great train wreck. Basically Garbers goal is to see MLS's fruition into one of the best leagues in the world.
I believe that may actually be the last addition, if it even made the list, For Sheikh Mansour Bin Zayed Al Nahyan. He see's MLS much like a money launderer and a off shore account rolled into one, for his English Diamond. Maybe Garber has found an opponent he cannot win against and underestimated. Mansour Bin Zayed could sue him into the cosmos on any given sunday if Garber tried to control his interests. He could bring many lawyers into this and threaten Garber, or worse make him and the league look bad publicly. The other side I see is. If Man city actually uses NYCFC as a reserve team and theyre successfull at it for both sides. If they actually do a good job swapping players between theyre rosters and avoiding costs at home. It could mean other big clubs try to take a stake in the north american market. Expansion teams could pop up, backed by Inter, Man U, Bayern etc. This would help both sides, because its already what Garber wanted when he sold a Expansion team to MCFC. I could see others coming for it. If they act like theyre using us and care not for our best interests, than it all falls.

Oh and I watched all of David Villas A league Games (I bet on alot of asian soccer at night) He's not the same David, He's soon to be 34, He did score 2 in 4 games but he looked invisible on the pitch, much like defoe's first sunderland game. His goals were easy ones if you had enough experience to know where to stand. He will place around 5 to 7th in goals imo. He is not gonna be a 1 man wrecking ball, thats what Melbourne City thought

sorry if its long and laden with grammatical errors, Im very tired