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
NWSL teams allocated Canadian players    
Six newly allocated Canada national team players -- players subsidized by the Canadian Soccer Association -- ...
What They're Saying: Sigi Schmid    
"I don't think we have that many ills to cure to begin with. There are no ...
MLS player tracker with complete rosters (Feb. 8)    
Columbus Crew SC waived former U.S. U-20 Romain Gall and Jamaican center back Sergio Campbell. Gall ...
Report: News Revs DP signing Kouassi out 6-9 months    
Ivorian midfielder Xavier Kouassi, acquired as a Designated Player to fill in the slot held by ...
Heavy U.S. influence in Concacaf women's qualifying    
The Concacaf Women's Olympic Qualifying Championship begins Wednesday in Texas with two berths in the Rio ...
Arguments behind latest legal sparks in U.S. women's suit    
U.S. Soccer and the Women's National Soccer Team Players Association were back in Federal court on ...
What They're Saying: Cristiano Ronaldo    
"I want to stay here two more years. The two years I'm talking about take me ...
Video Pick: Top 5 Bundesliga Goals of the Week     
Szabolcs Huszti (Eintracht Frankfurt), Havard Nordtveit (Bourssia M'Gladbach), Johannes Geis (Schalke 04), Nicolai Mueller (Hamburg SV) ...
Mexican Olympic team calls up FC Dallas keeper    
Jesse Gonzalez, who won FC Dallas' starting goalkeeper spot last August, is in camp with Mexico's ...
U.S. U-19 men lose to short-handed Canary Islands    
The U.S. U-19 men's national team (1998s) lost, 1-0, to the Canary Islands, which played the ...
>> Soccer America Daily Archives