Kaka's Deal and Criticism: Football Isn't Dying, Just Evolving
Undoubtedly, the story of the week is Kaka's proposed switch to Manchester City. With a transfer fee of more than £100 million, and the wages offered reported to be anything from £200,000 to £500,000 per week, it certainly is a sensational move.
Critics claim that this deal is "the death of football," the start of an era in which money rules all. But is it really any different from the scenario in the football world before City had their cash?
Roman built his empire at Chelsea by spending tens of millions of pounds on players who, had that amount of cash not been offered, would never have moved to West London. Of course, they were in the Champions League, but without Roman's money, they never would have achieved the success that they did under Mourinho.
City are going to try to become the new Chelsea, albeit it on an even larger scale. Rival fans will claim their money is ruining the Premier League—ironically, a competition which was only created in the pursuit of money—but the fact is the amount of money involved in football has been ridiculous for many, many years.
City are simply the next step.
It is not as though players have never moved for insane amounts of money before. Eight years ago, Zidane moved to Real Madrid for £46 million. Eight years earlier, the record had been £13,000,000. The Zidane transfer cost more than triple that. The Kaka deal is double what Zidane cost, but given the increase between the previous eight years, it's actually quite surprising it's taken so long for any club to spend £100 million.
It is simply the next step. Some players City will be able to tempt with their cash, and some they won't.
Anyway, money doesn't guarantee you success—just look at Leeds!
It is just what football has become. People have to accept that it has been solely about money to some players for a long time.
And will watching Kaka bamboozle Premier League defenses really be such a chore for the average football fan?
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?