Marketing ploy.
Add the full quote of what he was being asked. This lacks context.
I love this idea that Pulisic is a marketing ploy. It’s unbelievably dumb and is just feeds into the idea that there’s still an anti-American bias in football. Pulisic hasn’t made a dent on TV numbers in the USA. Dortmund often doesn’t make it onto US TV.
Yeah, Sarri gave his approval a month ago and didn't want to be updated on the deal. He likes to stay out of transfer dealings more than other managers. I'm not sure where the controversy is here to be honest.
While he was more candid about it, his quote implies an involvement in transfer that is probably typical of managers in continental leagues and especially Italy. They may ask for a certain kind of player but they usually aren't doing the scouting themselves.
Don't think there's anything controversial. I think Chelsea was right to acquire him. But the price was clearly dictated by other things than football because at that price they probably could have had a better player.Yeah, Sarri gave his approval a month ago and didn't want to be updated on the deal. He likes to stay out of transfer dealings more than other managers. I'm not sure where the controversy is here to be honest.
Marketing was always going to play a big part in any English team buying Pulisic.
Marketing what?
No one can ever explain this bad talking point. We are supposed to acknowledge its existence without anyone explaining it in detail. It makes no sense, but I guess it doesn't need to.
Fosu-Mensah’s loan with Fulham has been terminated by United (James Gray)
Why are Fulham referred to as Fulhamerica in the states? It ain't cause Khan owns the Jags too.
Could they though? Maybe they paid a premium to avoid a bidding war in the summer, but we won't really know what a bidding war would've looked like. It's less than what we spent on Morata. Pulisic is better than Morata and Morata offered 0 off-field revenue. It wasn't even that much in today's market.Don't think there's anything controversial. I think Chelsea was right to acquire him. But the price was clearly dictated by other things than football because at that price they probably could have had a better player.
Are Fulham games on TV more than other teams? Does Fulham's US presence bring in a substantial amount of money for the Premier League?
Also, the US Mens National Team isn't even the main National Team of the country. The Mexican National Team is more popular in the USA. They outdraw the USA 2-1 in games played in the USA.
Many Borussia Dortmund games haven't been shown on TV this season. This is while we are in first place. Bayern Munich is still the preferred team to show by Fox Sports. Pulisic didn't make a dent financially while at Borussia Dortmund.
If this has anything to do with marketing, Chelsea should fire their whole marketing department. There's not evidence that signing an American player has much of an impact on club finances.