The following is a translation of Johan Cruyff’s weekly article in El Periodico.  The original can be found here.

Is it worth losing your individuality in exchange for gaining an amount of money that is worth less than 10% of the budget? I think not, because this uniqueness, together with all that it represents to this club, is priceless.

I am totally against putting advertisement on the shirt in exchange for money. And I would say exactly the same thing had it been another president or another board that had given the nod to this operation. Where some see incredible figures (30 million per year for the next five years), I see that this equates to no more than 6 or 7% of the budget. (Depending how you value the contract)

This club is unique in the world. Nobody has kept its shirt intact over its history and at the same time still be competitive as anyone else. Will you sell this uniqueness for 6 or 7 % of your budget? It is what Barca stands for and what differentiates it in this world; are there no other avenues that can be used to increase the club’s income? Have the new executive board thought this thing through? Do they think the previous board is so empty-headed [not to have thought about this]?

And here, does it not mean anything anymore that we are forced to [sell advertising rights] … through the fault of others… [just because] we have a newcomer who, now as it was seven years ago, said he inherited some accounts that are in the red. [And this after] the other one [Laporta] was able to grabble with a problem that neither Núñez nor Gaspart was able to tackle. Now is this move a masterstroke or plain stupidity? Can it be called a brilliant move when 99.9 % of clubs in this world are doing the same? Or are you an idiot for being the last one to do it? Are they so brilliant that they can think of this deal barely three months into their term, where as others did not in seven years? Have the others been asleep all that time?

Barca is able to get more money than anyone else by selling [the rights to advertise on] their jerseys because it is currently the best team in the world. But two things come to mind: To whom should that credit go to? And why only now do we take advantage of this and not before? In terms of overall numbers, just to give up that uniqueness, one that differentiates us from everyone else, it might be worth it if it could cover the entire or perhaps 80 % or 60 % of our annual budget but never in exchange for 6 or 7 %, as is the case now.

The way I see it, by doing this, we stand to lose more than we gain, and that we are taking a huge step backwards. It seems indecent, and how that indecency is so widespread; something that was already done by everyone else. Barca carries the flag of this city, of this country, in this world. And as such, they should have looked at other means of generating income similar in value as selling the shirt to the highest bidder. By selling the shirt, it just shows how they lack creativity.

And why five years? Or is it six, as I have read. My experience with long term contracts is that what today seems a lot may seem insignificant tomorrow. What will the club be forced to do then? How many matches will be first team be forced to play in a year [including friendly/exhibition games]? How many functions do they have to attend, with whom and where? Based on this, the total value of the deal, it will mean they’ll have to do one or the other.

Is it worth taking this step? I believe not, except when there are no other viable means. This Barca, as it is now, is exceptional. The work done with its youth divisions, its footballing philosophy, its club model, in short, is guaranteed to generate income, and it is the envy of everyone. All this is not achieved in a mere three months but is the result of the work done by a lot of people over many years,  people with a sufficiently clear idea of what they want, of who they are and what their people want, and that the money, while still important, is not a guarantee of success. One only needs to study the budgets of some other clubs in Spain, Europe, around the world, to see that making more money does not always equal victories. Football is played with a ball, an idea, and with a style. That this same Barca is the best proof that they can do that, not just well but very well, without needing money from a shirt advertising  deal.

Mistakes in the management of a club can be attributed to a lot of things, and everyone commits them. It is unlikely that no one has. Hence to take a step that others [who have failed] have taken is not sensible. And to do this in the year that you have just taken charge of the club just because you want to overturn a problem with the accounts from red to green, when earlier managements had not [even considered it]. That jersey is there for all [if they want to take advantage of].

How much does Barca pay for carrying the UNICEF logo on its shirt? Yes, Barca does pay, and it does not charge anything. One and a half million a year? If things are that bad, why not make a cut there. And with UNICEF out, so goes everything that it stands for and the good things which we intend to achieve when we join up with them. And all because you think that more instant cash means more successes. No, I’m sorry, we already had that success. And it is via a model, a style, and a way of transmitting it.

Dismiss this point, then it is just instant cash to prop up the economy. Brilliant. How had we not realised this before? We will be the last one to do so, the last to finally see it. Well, I’ll be an idealist or a romantic, but my mind takes me to always love sports and how to improve them. The current model is viable and can be further improved. I would not do away with it without first exhausting other more imaginative ways.