Join Now | 
HomeAboutContact UsPrivacy & SecurityAdvertise
Soccer America DailySoccer World DailySpecial EditionAround The NetSoccer Business InsiderCollege Soccer ReporterYouth Soccer ReporterSoccer on TVSoccer America ClassifiedsGame Report
Paul Gardner: SoccerTalkSoccer America ConfidentialYouth Soccer InsiderWorld Cup Watch
RSS FeedsArchivesManage SubscriptionsSubscribe
Order Current IssueSubscribeManage My SubscriptionRenew My SubscriptionGift Subscription
My AccountJoin Now
Tournament CalendarCamps & AcademiesSoccer GlossaryClassifieds
Blame the EPL, not American owners
by Paul Kennedy, October 7th, 2010 12:48AM

MOST READ
TAGS:  england

MOST COMMENTED

[MY VIEW] Wednesday's news that one American group will succeed another as the owner of Liverpool, one of the most revered clubs in English soccer, brought more moans and groans from the other side of the Atlantic, where American owners are vilified. But English critics are barking up the wrong tree if they think American owners are the problem.

Liverpool has been on a downward spiral since Americans Tom Hicks and George Gillett bought the club in 2007. The Reds reached a new low last weekend when they lost at home to lowly Blackpool and fell in the relegation zone.

"Built by Shanks, Broke by Yanks" read one of the banners at Anfield, referring to legendary manager Bill Shankly and Hicks and Gillett.

Liverpool's problems weren't its owners, American or otherwise, but the English Premier League, which allowed Hicks and Gillett to buy the club with borrowed money. Just as it allowed the Glazer family to buy Manchester United with borrowed money.

Both deals proved disastrous when the world financial markets crumbled in late 2008, leaving the owners with no one willing to refinance their loans on favorable terms.

Until the EPL tightens it ownership rules like those that exist in American sports, it will have no one to blame but itself the next time a club is thrown into crisis like Liverpool has been.



0 comments
  1. Brian Herbert
    commented on: October 7, 2010 at 11:33 a.m.
    Absolutely right. Sports franchises are very different from a "real" business, and even real businesses get over-leveraged with debt. I think history shows sports franchises are best owned by one or more wealthy individuals putting in THEIR OWN money.


Sign in to leave a comment. Don't have an account? Join Now




AUTHORS

ARCHIVES
FOLLOW SOCCERAMERICA

Recent Soccer America Daily
U.S. Abroad: Torres absent from Copa Libertadores final    
After starting both legs of the semifinals, Jose Torres did not play for Mexico's Tigres in ...
MLS honors Rothenberg with legacy award    
MLS founder Alan Rothenberg was named the first recipient of an award that will bear his ...
What They're Saying: Prince Ali    
"[Michel] Platini is not good for FIFA, Football's fans and players deserve better. FIFA is engulfed ...
MLS All-Star Game Takeaways: Kaka carries All-Stars    
Brazilian star Kaka says he grew up and loved watching U.S. all-star games. He finally got ...
ICYMI MLS: Penedo leaves Galaxy, Barnetta goes to Philly    
It looks like Donovan Ricketts could be on his way back to L.A. in the aftermath ...
Video Pick: Lloyd golazo ups goal streak to seven games    
If there is one lesson NWSL opponents should have learned from the Women's World Cup, it's ...
What They're Saying: Abby Wambach    
"I haven't made a decision about the Olympics next summer and I would have to make ...
USL Roundup: Board of Governors meets in Denver    
For the third straight year, the USL has held its annual midseason Board of Governors meeting ...
How does MLS All-Stars vs. Liga MX All-Stars sound?    
With Wednesday's AT&T MLS All-Star Game set to pit the MLS All-Stars against Tottenham at Dick's ...
TV Report: Gold Cup reaches more than 6.8 million viewers    
The Gold Cup final between Mexico and Jamaica was watched by 6 million viewers on Univision, ...
>> Soccer America Daily Archives