Bleacher Report - Articles by Jake Wilson

Are Chelsea and Real Madrid Now Ruining Football?

Jake Wilson — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 13:05:37 -0400

Back in January, the footballing world reacted with outrage at the astronomical bid for Kaká by Manchester City. Now comes news that Real Madrid and Chelsea have followed suit with record bids for the AC Milan star.

The media, fans, owners, and managers must respond with the same denunciation that greeted City's attempt to sign the former World Footballer of the Year. Anything less, and a clear hypocrisy will be laid bare for all to see.

If you were one of those Chicken Littles talking about "the death of football" back in the winter, you'd better be experiencing those some apocalyptic visions this time around.

If Manchester City were ruining the game by offering a financially strapped club a lifeline with an obscene amount of money for its prized asset, then Real Madrid and Chelsea are putting the sport in the same danger.

If Manchester City were attempting to turn a great player into a mercenary by offering ridiculous wages, then both clubs currently involved with Kaká are guilty of the same offense.

The sad reality is that we won't see anything like the reaction we did to City's attempt to capture Kaká.

It's clear there are one set of rules for the royalty of football, and another set for the unwashed masses.

Manchester United can do all the ethically dubious poaching of young players from other clubs that it desires. Real Madrid can put together The Galacticos and people are starry-eyed.

Yet, when a club like Manchester City attempts to break up the "Big Four" cabal in the Premier League, suddenly they're demonized for not knowing—or at least not accepting—their station in life.

Fans of the Premier League often bemoan the stratified nature of the league, with the same four teams earning Champions League spots year after year, as they take turns winning titles. (Sorry, Liverpool. I guess your turn hasn't come yet.)

Yet, people ignore the reality that the money is what drives success in football these days. The Big Four are the Big Four because of the financial resources they have.

The only way we'll see a shakeup in the Premier League is when other clubs match those four in financial commitment. Yet, any club that attempts to do so is universally chastised for stepping out of line, as Manchester City can tell you all too well.

How quickly we forget the history of Chelsea, who themselves are newcomers to the upper crust of world football. It wasn't until the club was the fortunate beneficiary of a similar takeover by a wealthy new owner who had the audacity to take on the status quo.

Hundreds of millions of pounds and years later, Chelsea have been transformed from fodder for English comedians into a genuine footballing power. Now, they're on the other side of that fence, apparently free to do as they see fit without fear of public condemnation.

While suffering the slings and arrows of the hypocritical media and fans, at least Manchester City can take comfort in the fact that the nouveau riche apparently are quickly accepted into footballing high society.

Five years from now, Manchester City will be the ones making "sensational" bids, while some other uppity wannabe is threatening the very existence of the sport with a comparable bid.

At least City supporters should be able to empathise with that club's supporters and reserve their worry and vitriol for something that actually deserves it.

The rest of you could use some of that perspective right about now.

Barry's Move to Manchester City All About Champions League Football

Jake Wilson — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 18:50:49 -0400

As the shock waves subside from Manchester City's capture of Gareth Barry, the player has come under criticism from Aston Villa supporters for what they see as an inconsistency in Barry's rationale for leaving their club.

When asked at the time about a potential move to Liverpool that became last summer's longest-running saga, Barry cited a desire to play Champions League football. Given that Manchester City won't be playing in the UEFA Champions League next season—or in Europe at all, for that matter—Villans are resorting to calling the 11-year veteran a money-grubbing mercenary on internet message boards and article comment sections.

The problem with all of this is two-fold: Firstly, leaving one employer for a bigger paycheck from another is something one will find in nearly every field, and especially in the world of football. Very few footballers will opt to willingly take a pay cut when switching employers.

Secondly, the talk of Barry leaving for a club not playing Champions League football is shortsightedly focusing entirely on the 2009-2010 season. Given that Barry's deal is five years long, you can bet the player and his agent were savvy enough to take the long view on all of this.

Football fans tend view the future through a prism of the past. This worked fairly well in the old days, when clubs had to build themselves on success over time. Nowadays, with cash ruling everything around football, it's an entirely different paradigm. The old notion of "big" and "small" clubs can be altered with the signing of takeover documents.

Traditionalists who would like to believe it's the same game they followed when they were children spout off nonsense like "You can't buy success." Unfortunately, these statements display a gross ignorance of the past decade.

After not winning a title in 50 years, Chelsea were minted and suddenly won back-to-back Premier League titles.

Similarly, the bizarre talk of the Galactico approach failing at Real Madrid ignores the European and domestic titles won in that era.

History shows it's simply very difficult to dodge success whilst bringing in top-notch talent.

Armed with a reported £250 million budget, Mark Hughes will be looking to do exactly that in the summer transfer window at Manchester City.

Yes, there will be players like Kaká, who won't be swayed by the master plan in place at Eastlands.

However, for every Kaká, there will be a Robinho, willing to put his faith in the club's bright future.

So, no. Gareth Barry won't be playing Champions League football next season. Just like he wouldn't had he stayed put at Aston Villa. What he does get with his move to Manchester improved future prospects.

Who knows what the Premier League tables will look like in a few years. Arsenal appear set to sell their only bona fide striker after a season in which they flirted with disaster by nearly losing their Champions League place.

Yet, had Barry instead departed Villa for the Emirates, he wouldn't be subjected to this second-guessing. This despite making this hypothetical move to a club likely with bleaker prospects of Champions League involvement beyond next season than what he'll be getting at Eastlands.

Make no mistake about it. Barring an injury, Gareth Barry will taste Champions League football during his five-year contract at Manchester City. It may or may not come the year after next, but it will come.

That's something Aston Villa simply can not promise, and that's why his move has everything to do with Champions League football.

And why it makes so much sense.

How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Sheikh Mansour

Jake Wilson — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 11:43:03 -0500

The reports of the death of football are greatly exaggerated.

Everywhere you turn these days, some columnist, talking head or message board Chicken Little is predicting Manchester City's transfer market spending orgy will bring about the end of the world's favorite sport.

The thinking goes that some middling English club whose number came up in the Abu Dhabi lottery will buy glory at the expense of all those honest, more deserving clubs out there, while sending player values into the stratosphere.

In reality, however, the only thing in any real peril is the status quo.

To hear the naysayers prattle on, you'd think we're currently enjoying a game free of the corrupting influence of money. Football is not the babe in the woods this lot would have us believe. If you need proof, look at who has been winning the trophies.

England is dominated by its Big Four: Manchester United, Chelsea, Arsenal, and Liverpool. The Premier League has turned into an annual exercise of figuring out the order in which those four will finish atop the league. Speculation over whether upstarts Aston Villa might pip Arsenal for fourth place passes for drama these days.

In Europe, clubs like Steaua Bucureşti and Nottingham Forest had been crowned champions as recently as the 1980s, but clearly cash rules everything around UEFA these days, as the past winners have been Manchester United, AC Milan, Barcelona, Liverpool.

Money has long since stratified football, with clubs engorged on Champions League revenues swooping in and raiding smaller clubs for talent. To yearn for the days when money didn't buy success is to go back much farther than most of the people making these arguments care to realize.

Apologists for big football clubs will argue that they have earned their status as big spenders by virtue of their success on the pitch, but have they really? Success has come at a price even for vaunted clubs like Manchester United and AC Milan.

United's debt has reached frightening levels, and were the club to miss out on Champions League football even one season it almost certainly would be unable to afford its sizable debt payments. Likewise, AC Milan are in the red to the point they were much more proactive in finding a prospective buyer for Kaká than has been suggested by the media.

Unless they are selling stars to Manchester City, these clubs do stand to lose the most. With the deepest pockets in world football thanks to owner Sheikh Mansour, who views the entire enterprise as good advertising around the world for Abu Dhabi, City are free to spend without worry of plunging farther into debt.

There will be some slight inflationary effect on transfer fees and salaries as a result, as agents and selling clubs will play up possible interest from City to get the most in transfer fees and wages. However, this really should only affect City's direct competition, meaning the Big Four in England, the three Italian powers Inter Milan, AC Milan, and Juventus, and Spanish giants Real Madrid and Barcelona.

It's not as if City will be getting into bidding wars with Port Vale over Gareth Owen. Only the very top of the transfer market will be affected, and as any consumer credit advisor can tell you, clubs in debt like Manchester United and Milan really shouldn't be spending that money anyway.

As for the outrage over the reported £107 million value placed on Kaká, clubs have been quoting nine-figure prices for their own players for years now. Up until Sheikh Mansour came along, this had been a cheeky way of saying a player wasn't for sale. All City have done is actually call the bluff of one of these clubs by putting in a bid for the seemingly exorbitant price.

Where was the furor and doomsday predictions back in the spring when Real Madrid were reportedly set to buy Cristiano Ronaldo for an almost identical sum? Because it was an already-big club doing the buying, somehow it was more palatable, since the status quo was preserved.

The sights and sounds currently coming out of Milan suggest the deal will go through and Kaká will leave storied AC Milan for nothing more than the promise of a project to build City into a global footballing power, and sky-high wages of course.

While the prospect of the status quo being upset in such a way is a disturbing concept to some folks, it's a safe bet that most of them have a vested interest in things staying the way they had been.

No matter what happens with Kaká this month, the sun will continue to rise every morning, football will continue to be the most entertaining sport on the planet and City fans will continue to expect to be disappointed by their club in the end.

The only difference is that in a few years, their disappointment may stem from their club falling just short of the treble.

Philadelphia Phillies Will Count on Lockdown Bullpen

Jake Wilson — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 08:42:45 -0400

If you've watched a game involving the Phillies or seen highlights of their postseason wins, you're undoubtedly aware of the fact they are undefeated when holding the lead after eight innings. While part of this undoubtedly is due to the sensational form of closer Brad Lidge, Philadelphia General Manager Pat Gillick has assembled a deep and capable surrounding cast in the bullpen.

Stolen from Houston last November in what now looks like a lopsided deal, all Lidge has done in his first season in red pinstripes is convert all 41 save opportunities while posting a 1.95 ERA in the regular season. In the playoffs, he's perfect in five save opportunities with a 1.23 ERA.

Lidge's biggest weapon is a lethal slider that opposing hitters have trouble picking out from a mid-90s fastball. He has used that combination of pitches to become the all-time leader in strikeout rate in the history of Major League Baseball among pitchers with at least 200 appearances.

Lidge hasn't been completely lights-out recently, recording just two perfect innings in his last eight appearances, but in the end, he's gotten the job done every time.

The bridge to Lidge took a hit when set-up man Tom Gordon was lost to a season-ending elbow injury in early July, but roles were juggled and the rest of the bullpen stepped up. Manager Charlie Manuel has used several relievers in the set-up role since then, often opting to let matchups dictate his calls to the bullpen.

J.C. Romero signed as a free agent last June after the Red Sox released him due to a numbers crunch. Romero has been remarkable coming out of the bullpen for Manuel, putting up a 2.17 ERA with the Phillies. The lefty handcuffed batters to the tune of a .197 batting average allowed; however, he does struggle with his control at times, as evidenced by his 38 walks in 59 innings.

Tampa Bay's left-handed hitters aren't going to want to look out at the mound as see Romero, as he has completely shut down left-handed bats to the tune of a minuscule .102 average and .342 OPS on the year.

Ryan Madson is the Phillies' primary right-handed set-up option. The owner of a devastating change-up that he mixes in with a good fastball and the occasional breaking ball, Madson has had identical 3.05 ERAs the past two seasons after a disastrous tryout as a starter in 2006. The lanky Madson gives his manager some flexibility, able to go more than inning if circumstances require it.

Following a spectacular first half of the season, in which he allowed just 11 earned runs in 52.1 innings (1.89 ERA), Chad Durbin struggled to keep that form in the second half. After the All Star break, Durbin's ERA was a much more pedestrian 4.33.

The righty is very, very tough on right-handed hitters, who combined for just a .589 OPS against him this season. Interestingly, Durbin's home ERA (1.88) in the bandbox that is Citizens Bank Park is far lower than his road ERA (4.37).

Banged around in limited duty with the Cubs the first four months, a change in scenery has done Scott Eyre a world of good. As a Phillie, the lefty specialist has a 1.88 ERA and has been extremely tough on left-handed hitters, who have a lowly .174 batting average against him.

Should the Phillies need some innings eaten, expect to see Clay Condrey. The long reliever's solid 3.26 ERA looks rather fortunate when you consider opposition batters hit .302 off him, but he doesn't issue many free passes and doesn't give up a lot of extra-base hits.

Manuel is going with a four-man rotation again in the World Series, with rookie J.A. Happ serving as the emergency starter and another option in long relief. Happ's solid 3.69 ERA is the highest of any reliever on the Phillies World Series roster.

While past performance is no guarantee of future results, if the Rays find themselves trailing after the sixth inning against the Phillies, they're going to face a tough task against Philadelphia postseason bullpen with a combined ERA of just 2.83.

Sven-Göran Eriksson, Thaksin Shinawatra Saga Exposes Failures of English Press

Jake Wilson — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 03:55:56 -0400

All of the "reporting" regarding the situation with Manchester City manager Sven-Göran Eriksson's status clearly illuminates the shambolic state of the English fourth estate when it comes to coverage of sport.

The Manchester Evening News speaks of Eriksson's "shock sacking" as if it has already occurred.

The Telegraph claims owner Thaksin Shinawatra's behavior "had prompted Eriksson to consider resigning at the weekend and forfeiting about £1 million in severance pay."

Even The Guardian runs an article that speaks of "Thaksin Shinawatra's ruthless decision to pay off Sven-Göran Eriksson" as if this has already taken place and refers to Eriksson as already having "given up hope and can expect compensation of £1m."

None of these stories would have been deemed fit to print in the United States, as none of them cite a single source—even anonymously—for these claims.

The only quotes they have run are from Eriksson's assistant and agent. Neither has come close to corroborating the claims that a sacking has already been decided upon.

Sadly, this is par for the course for the English sport media. No sourcing. No quotes. Just rampant hearsay.

And the English have come to expect this behavior from their press, what with newspapermen printing as fact their own rampant speculation about transfer targets on a near-hourly basis. The whole thing is laughable from a journalism perspective.

Why is there such a drastic contrast in journalistic quality between the news and sport departments at the same paper?

Right now the headlines should read "Man City owner considering sacking Eriksson," but instead we're treated to even more blind speculation about his potential successors. And for everyone involved, that's just pathetic.