Long and Jelavic will strengthen Hull City - but at what price?

Well now, Hull Tigers - sorry, I mean Hull City.

Shane Long looks set to join Nikica Jelavic at the KC Stadium. There are two impressive signings for a club without much top-division history.

I imagine those complaining about the potential name change are biting their tongues right now.

Just a couple of days ago owner Assem Allam, 74, said he would leave "within 24 hours" if his application to alter the name to Hull Tigers is not backed.

Hull City fans reacted angrily to this, saying he had shown a lack of respect. The trouble is, as I have said on here before, they must be delighted at the player investment at the club, making the team stronger all the time, but such ambition comes at a price (the potential name change).

Wow, I've just noticed that the official club website is now called HullCityTigers.com. It's started already.

Is it the way the fans want the club to go?

Does a club have to sell its soul to compete?

When Roman Abramovich took over at Chelsea and transformed them into League winners and eventually into European champions with his billions, football in this country was changed forever.

It meant that a club had to have similar billions to compete.

Manchester City, for example, have received that their billions and they won the League and look set to add silverware to their tally again this season.

Now, we all wish for a billionaire sugar daddy to come to our club. Or do we?

As my club, Leeds United, looks at possible investment from Red Bull, I wonder whether we'd be selling our soul.

Examples at Cardiff City and Hull City make you wonder whether life really is greener with all the money.

Fans at Hull City don't want a name change to Hull Tigers, but they like the investment. Fans at Cardiff City hate the colour change from blue to red, weren't happy that Malky Mackay was sacked, and must fear what might happen next, but they must know that they need Mr Tan's money to keep them in the Premier League.

Leeds United fans would not accept a change of club colours to the red of Red Bull, I know for sure. As for a name change to Red Bull Leeds (like Red Bull Salzberg), no thanks - I'd rather stay in the Championship.

But you need billions to compete.

Chelsea fans have been unhappy with Abramovich's eccentric sackings and appointments at various times, but they're never going to call for him to go, are they?

They sold their soul and the rest of us might have to do the same.

Tigers: what's in a nickname need not be in a name

I'm right behind Hull City supporters in their fight against the proposed name change of their club to Hull Tigers.

Yuk.

Current Hull City owner Assem Allam has applied to the FA to change the club's name from next season. I have to confess I didn't know a club had to apply to the FA for a name change - I thought that would be a club decision. However, if applying to the FA helps stop this nonsense, then the application process is obviously a good thing. It seems that an FA council has "absolute discretion" over the name change decision.

Hull have been City since their formation in 1904, the nickname "Tigers" seemingly coming from a Hull Daily Mail reporter the following year.

Hull City supporters have formed a "City Till I Die" campaign, and they hope the FA will deny the name change application. It seems that the FA will consult Hull City supporters on the name change. If they do, then it's dead in the water. Allam has allegedly said that opponents "can die as soon as they want". That's helpful and encompassing, isn't it? He reckons the renaming will help with the branding of the club. Not where it matters - in Hull - it won't.

Football could learn a lot from other sports (use of technology, timing of play, treating injuries while the game goes on, among others), but silly suffixes to names is certainly not one of them.

Premier League half-time report

We're just over half-way through the Premier League season, so who's looking good (or bad) for 2010?

Manchester United hit five against Wigan, and Arsenal notched four at Portsmouth to give Chelsea fair warning that they're up for the fight for the title in the New Year. It's hard to see beyond these three, yet all three have faltered and the number of defeats for the title contenders this season is higher than usual. No team is showing consistency yet, and the team that does will emerge as favourites.

But who will that be? I always fancy Chelsea as they are resilient and have huge resources. However, without Drogba during the African Nations Cup, they could lose points in games that should be bankers.

I don't think Manchester United are the team they were last season, and injuries make theiur squad look brittle. Yet Wayne Rooney is having some inspirational games, and he might just win them the title in that mood.

Arsenal don't quite look the finished article - especially when up against the top teams - but it would be great to see such a fluent footballing side take the title.

However, through it all, I'll take Rooney to tip the balance United's way.

Given that these three will fill the tops three positions, who else will join them in the Champions League places. Emphatically not Liverpool, who are simply not good enough. So, what of Tottenham Hotspur, Manchester City and Aston Villa? None of them is showing enough consistency to challenge the top three, but with their resources and perhaps a bit of that elusive consistency, I take Roberto Mancinie to guide City into fourth place. It will be interesting to watch, whatever happens.

At the bottom, Portsmouth are four points adrift and look to have too many difficulties (for example, they lose four place to the African Nations Cup in January) to avoid the drop. Of the rest, West Ham look capable of survival, and I think Bolton will escape too. That leaves Hull City, Wolves, Wigan, Burnley, Blackburn Rovers and Stoke City as likely candidates, though Everton and Sunderland could yet run into a sticky patch.

I'll go with Hull City and Wigan Athletic to join Portsmouth in the Championship next season.

Rumours abound but Phil Brown remains at Hull City

I hope we haven’t reached the stage where managers get sacked on rumours.

Yesterday Hull City were compelled to deny the rumours circulating the media and internet world that boss Phil Brown was about to be sacked.

Nevertheless, it is understood that meetings at the club will continue into Thursday to discuss the future of Brown as well as club chairman Paul Duffen.

Hull City fans booed Brown during last Saturday’s tame 0-0 draw with bottom club Portsmouth, and the Tigers remain in the bottom three.

How quickly they all forget.

It was Brown who got Hull City promoted to the Premier League via the play-offs in 2008, and the team clung on to their top status last season, finishing one place above the relegation places. Brown has been in full charge since January 2007.

Relegation could be bad for the club. According to accountants Deloitte the club needs £23m to meet its liabilities, and relegation would cost the club £7m for losing top-flight status. However, many clubs have come through this sort of problem before.

Brown’s “crime” has been over-achievement – getting the club to the Premier League too soon. It was only in 2004 that the club emerged from the lowest tier of the Football League.

It seems to me that some clubs, fans and directors don’t know when they’re well off.