[CallumRogers]

Glazer owns both your club and Manchester United, doesnt it worry you that Utd. will always take precedence over your team? unless you think they dont, but consider Utd. are one of the top 3 sports clubs in the world (fan base, turnover ect).

Im not a United supported but i know if my team was owned by some guy that had loyalties elsewhere id be worried.

Part of the reason im asking is that i have no idea how American football works, i know you guys draft players ect. so does that mean your team doesnt need alot of money to bring in new players. United will be spending 60 mil + ($120 mil) AT LEAST this season so i would imagine that leaves you out of pocket.

Also is he well liked there? cuz in England hes hated by the United supporters.

Bare in mind when you answer this that there is not enough money to go around, he had to borrow about a billion to buy Untied and is loosing £60 mil a year on interest.
Steelern:

I think to profit sharing, salary cap thing in in the NFL is quite good, not sure it would work here though, the Prem is too set in its ways. And the scary thing, the reason i asked this question is that money doesnt always come from the clubs own coffers, it comes directly from the owner, see for example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Abramovich he put over $1.2 b of his own money into the club in about 2 years!

David V:
You should defiantly look into your consortium idea, not to spite the glazers, just because its good for sport. Man U fans tried it but failed as Utd were to expensive so they set up their own club, FC Utd. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F.C._United_of_Manchester i think you would like to read that.

I feel sorry for you in America with that franchise thing, moving clubs. Its unnatural i really feel for supporters who have been hit by that.

BTW, Im a Blackburn supporter, I dont like Utd, AT ALL but feel for the genuine supporters