- Jan 27, 2008
- 3,806
- 16,254
Surely not, A&C is always fair and balanced in his view of Levy and ENIC in generalA question that’s been growing in my mind, that I don’t have an answer to, is have ENIC done better as custodians of the club than any other reasonably competent owner would have? We hear the ‘better the devil you know’ and ‘might do a Leeds’ statements a lot when ENIC are questioned - but that depends on an exceptionally bad alternative and can we truly say that ENIC have been exceptionally good?
For the first 15 years or so I was very much in the ENIC are doing a decent job camp. They took over the club when we were languishing and returned us to where we should have been all along. (Average league finish 6th, average Premier League finish also 6th.) It felt like they were on a positive trajectory, and although it was frustrating that the journey was a long one, they returned us from relegation contenders to top six regulars. The playing squad improved and it felt that ENIC’s success and our success were tied together.
The decisions to spend when league placings and revenue were threatened rather than trophies possible seemed like a smallish divergence from ENIC’s interests and ours. The stadium a bigger one, with the desire to move the club to Stratford in order to achieve greater revenue for lower cost. We have built a multi-use entertainment megaplex that cost a lot of money when we could have built a football stadium for less. The debt attached to THFC rather than ENIC.
Now we’ve had the Super League debacle. Not just a lack of consultation with players, staff, fans, etc but an apparent disregard for them. Followed up with clinging on to the idea and the mealy mouthed non-apology. Do we believe that the increased revenue would have been used to improve the football club? I’m not sure I do anymore. Before, I wouldn’t have given much credence to the noise about Levy being out of touch, being left behind in terms of not just football but business decision making, now? Well...
For 15 years I’ve been ENIC in, the last five years (assisted by @Archibald&Crooks propaganda) I’ve slowly become more ENIC out, and the Super League debacle finally makes up my mind. Yes, there is an argument that from a business perspective it was necessary but not from a football one, not unilaterally, not if you value the club, the fans, the history, the tradition. And it’s not just that, if there are sanctions, consequences, as there should and likely will be - then it is an atrocious decision that is bad for the football club and bad for the business as separate as those seem to have become of late.
So now I’m questioning my previous position that Levy and ENIC were doing a good job. ‘Be careful what you wish for’ is the oft used cliche. But have we been selling our wishes short? Things could have been worse, no doubt. Could they not also have been better? Which brings me back to my original question: have ENIC really been so brilliant for us that they deserve to be held in such high regard? Have they really done so much better than the vast majority of football club owners could have done?