Bayern Munich gesture

posturingpat

Bayern Munich haven't always been a favourite of Neutrals around Europe but few will argue this is an extremely generous act. Let's hope others follow suit

http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/34142261

Oat23

posturingpat wrote: »

Bayern Munich haven't always been a favourite of Neutrals around Europe..

Do people have a problem with self-sustaining teams who build their success from within or something?

jaykay74

Oat23 wrote: »

Do people have a problem with self-sustaining teams who build their success from within or something?

I think neutrals like to see underdogs do well, not that hard to understand really.

Boskowski

jaykay74 wrote: »

I think neutrals like to see underdogs do well, not that hard to understand really.

True but in fairness to Bayern they haven't had anything handed to them. They are where they are on their own merits and they never went nuts and they have some pretty good stories around them. Like going after a fallen Gerd Mueller who had become an alcoholic in America and taking him in and sort him out and he's still working for them today. They look after their own. A lot of people especially in Germany hate them as they have become so big and almost overwhelming in that league. But they are a pretty impressive story at the same time, can't deny that.

Oat23

jaykay74 wrote: »

I think neutrals like to see underdogs do well, not that hard to understand really.

With football the way is these days, you could argue Bayern are one of the underdogs. You have teams like PSG, Chelsea & City all looking to challenge for the best players and for European titles with their owners who have bottomless pockets, then you have Bayern who have no rich owner and are still a level above those three.

Oat23

Oat23 wrote: »

With football the way is these days, you could argue Bayern are one of the underdogs. You have teams like PSG, Chelsea & City all looking to challenge for the best players and for European titles with their owners who have bottomless pockets, then you have Bayern who have no rich owner and are still a level above those three.

Bayern will always be a bigger and more prestigious club than Chelsea or City.

dfx-

Domestically it makes absolute sense with a huge fanbase outside of Munich. Same could be said of Juventus with fans across Italy. Added to their ability to raid clubs. Neuer being a particular example. Gotze. Lewandowski.

From my time attending 1860 games a few years ago, there's a huge disparity between the fans who go to Bayern games and those going to 1860 games. 1860 is almost exclusively Munich based fans. For Bayern games fans were from everywhere, they just happened to play in Munich, a bit like a franchise.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/may/25/bayern-munich-germans-love-to-hate

Oat23

rarnes1 wrote: »

Bayern will always be a bigger and more prestigious club than Chelsea or City.

My point was that teams like Chelsea & City have more money and are more willing to splash on one player than Bayern would be, so Bayern could be considered the underdog in that top tier of teams.

miroslavklose

Oat23 wrote: »

My point was that teams like Chelsea & City have more money and are more willing to splash on one player than Bayern would be, so Bayern could be considered the underdog in that top tier of teams.

Why? They're worth more than all of them. City and Chelsea are willing to splash more on one player because they're smaller clubs.

In any case, a large (shrinking) portion of Bayern's income has always been from local companies, not materially much different from the families that built up clubs like Liverpool, Manchester United, right through to Chelsea and Man City. It's one of the main reasons they've been always had an advantage in Germany.

Boskowski

Boskowski wrote: »

True but in fairness to Bayern they haven't had anything handed to them.

1974 European Cup?

Well, I guess the theory is that it wasn't so much handed to them as paid for!

Oat23

Oat23 wrote: »

My point was that teams like Chelsea & City have more money and are more willing to splash on one player than Bayern would be, so Bayern could be considered the underdog in that top tier of teams.

I get your point but I'd still be backing Munich in a tie over either of them tbh.

Crann na Beatha

This post has been deleted.

JT26

JT26 wrote: »

must have been bitterly disappointing for you in 2012 so!

Don't think I was too disappointed.

Would you agree Munich would be favourites over either team atm??

FutureGuy

Post about the generosity of a club turns into debate regarding likeability and success of said club.

Only on boards.

FutureGuy

FutureGuy wrote: »

Post about the generosity of a club turns into debate regarding likeability and success of said club.

Only on boards.

And a post complaining about other posts in a thread. Only on boards.

---

Anyway, great gesture by Munich. Doubt anyone will disagree with that

Giggsy11

Great gesture and it's good to see football clubs doing something big for society.

Richard Hillman

They should continue the moral gestures by getting rid of that man managing the 1st team.

Washington Irving

FutureGuy wrote: »

Post about the generosity of a club turns into debate regarding likeability and success of said club.

Only on boards.

Only on Boards me hole.

The_Kew_Tour

Fair play to Bayern, always come across well tbh.

Pity people have to get their digs in at Bayern and other clubs in a thread that should not have it.

Zebra3

Boskowski wrote: »

True but in fairness to Bayern they haven't had anything handed to them.

They had the use of the Olympic Stadium handed to them in the early 70s.

This allowed them to build their revenue up far higher than any other German club.

They used this advantage to continuously buy the best players from other German sides at a time when Italian and Spanish clubs were restricted from buying their best.

RobertKK

Well done Bayern, showing humanity.

PSG's owners would never do this...

Boskowski

Zebra3 wrote: »

They had the use of the Olympic Stadium handed to them in the early 70s.

This allowed them to build their revenue up far higher than any other German club.

They used this advantage to continuously buy the best players from other German sides at a time when Italian and Spanish clubs were restricted from buying their best.

They actually shared the stadium with 1860. Before that they shared the stadium at Gruenwalder Strasse. What other club should have been allowed to rent the Olympic Stadium other than those two?

Hertha for example has the Olympic Staium forever, definitely since they had to sell the 'Plumpe' in Gesundbrunnen, Wedding after their financial, bribery scandal. Going by your logic that should have automatically made them a top team and yet they aren't.

RobertKK

Real Madrid are donating €1 million to help the refugees.

niallo27

In fairness most football clubs do a lot for their towns and cities but it is often ignored as football is seen as being part of the lower class of society.

Zebra3

Boskowski wrote: »

They actually shared the stadium with 1860. Before that they shared the stadium at Gruenwalder Strasse. What other club should have been allowed to rent the Olympic Stadium other than those two?

Hertha for example has the Olympic Staium forever, definitely since they had to sell the 'Plumpe' in Gesundbrunnen, Wedding after their financial, bribery scandal. Going by your logic that should have automatically made them a top team and yet they aren't.

Of course they shared the stadium, but it was still handed to them. Bayern had no financial risk in it and reaped the rewards.

And yes Hertha had the use of an Olympic stadium too, but that was built four decades earlier and resided in a part of Germany that was totally geopolitically different to Munich. So that has nothing to do with my logic.

Boskowski

Zebra3 wrote: »

Of course they shared the stadium, but it was still handed to them. Bayern had no financial risk in it and reaped the rewards.

And yes Hertha had the use of an Olympic stadium too, but that was built four decades earlier and resided in a part of Germany that was totally geopolitically different to Munich. So that has nothing to do with my logic.

Thats true but the thing is you can't compare the Bundesliga clubs with EPL clubs in that regard anyway (not that you did). Its only a recent development in Germany that some clubs actually build and own their stadiums. Years ago that was the exception. Most stadiums in the cities have always been part of the public infrastructure and were rented out to clubs by the councils. The situation with Bayern and the actually not well loved Olympic Stadium is no different to dozens of other clubs and cities in Germany.

Partly a reason for that is that Bundesliga clubs used to be no different to any other amateur sports club up until relatively recently as in that they were a 'Eingetragener Verein' meaning effectively they were kinda amateur non profit organisations run by volunteers mostly and thus had tax breaks, receipt of state funding etc. Only the commercialisation of the league has changed that. And even then usually the 'Verein' was separated from the professional football section but continued to exist as a separate entity mostly to protect it from the financial risks that naturally come with professional football. Its a very different landscape historically in Germany. When Bayern were 'handed' the Olympic Stadium they were an e.V.