You werenāt really off. Melwood was completely reconstructed during Houillierās time with us, around 2000. It was his long-term legacy for us, as it was a state-of-the-art training center at the time.
As far as I know, nothing was done during Rafaās reign, which was also g+hās. And since fsg have come in, there have been some minor works, but nothing comparable to the Kirkby project which has been accomplished now. Thatās a major feather in fsgās cap, well done.
What would you suggest? I mean, short of telling AXA to re-brand itself as āLiverpoolā (under licence, of course)? It seems perfectly ok to me. Inoffensive, or so I would have thought!!
I agree, ways of increasing sponsorship and additional income is something we have always lagged behind other clubs, but whenever the idea of selling naming rights to Anfield is suggested it gets shot down by fans pretty quickly.
As long as they donāt rename Anfield i donāt have a problem tbh. Maybe Iām a bit more used to it, we have a Signal Iduna Park and an Allianz Arena etc. in Germany tbf.
So for me, AXA Trainings Center sounds alright, as long as we get good money for this, especially in these ācovid timesā, it comes a bit as a relief that the club is able to sort something like this out.
I guess we should be getting used to the encroachment of corporate branding in traditional sportscapes. We have a state of the art and integrated training facility that probably sets us good for 20 years. It may be a small consolation, but in popular use it wont be The AXA Training Center or even the AXA Center. People will just say things like āmeet me at the training centerā or āI will be at the training centerā.
Regarding how much this deal with AXA could be worth, I found this on TIA:
(ā¦)
It is unclear how much Liverpoolās deal with AXA will be worth, but back in 2013, Man Unitedās eight-year sponsorship deal with AON ā which saw their Carrington training ground become known as the AON Training Complex ā was reported to be worth around Ā£180 million.