Man City 2020/21 - General discussion

[Ludens the Red]

'Pep didn't go in and coach what they had'.... Otamendi gets into PFA TOTS, Kompany and Mangala have PL medals, Delph is the mainstay LB for the team that got the most points in PL history and Zinchenko is our main LB right now.

Why must people be totally oblivious to what Pep came in and worked with defensively? By the same token, Klopp didn't come in and coach what they had because Clyne, Moreno, Karius, Kolo Toure, Caulker, Sakho got shifted out. In fact, only Joe Gomez remains from the backline Klopp inherited. Unless the expectation was that Pep was going to lead a 33 year old Sagna, 36 year old Demichelis and a 32 year old Clichy to PL glory, it's a ridiculous observation being made.

Delph was your mainstay lb because 50 million Mendy got injured and 25 million Danilo couldn’t cut it. Hasnt Zinchenko only been playing since Walker and Ake had injuries ? Anyway I digress.

I don’t think anyone thinks Pep should have just kept what he inherited all these years but @Sylar points out it’s that he’s been able to bring in a catalogue of defenders for incredible fees to get it right. And anyone who’s not delivered had been written off easily and another expensive one brought in. These are staggering advantages which although @footballistic orgasm claims other big/rich clubs have too, is simply not the case.

Pep has been at city since 2016 and these are the defensive players he’s been able to bring in.
Stones 50
Bravo 16
Ederson 35
Walker 45
Danilo 26
Mendy 50
Laporte 57
Rodri 63
Cancelo 60
Ake 40
Dias 62

That is almost half a billion pounds.

In the same time Klopp had had this defensive investment.
Matip free
Klavan 4
Karius 5
Robertson 8
Van Dijk 75
Fabinho 39
Alison 55
Tsimikas 12

198 million.

Man United in that same period have invested about 250 million in their defence. Chelsea about 350 million. Not even gonna bother with Spurs and Arsenal. It’d barely cross triple figures.

So it’s pretty clear Pep is working with resources on a different planet to most managers. And I think city fans need to accept it will always be something mentioned. To basically be allowed 100 million on average every summer JUST to bring in defensive players is pretty staggering. City could lose Stones and Dias to injury and theyd bring in 100 million worth of cover. Liverpool are having to play midfielders and rookies in defence. It also allows you to rotate your defenders more, which you have been doing a lot, again this is a massive advantage Pep has.

On the flip side of this, he hasn’t spent that much on attackers relative to what he’s spent on defence. Partly of course due to you having the talent there already but also because he excels more than any manager probably in the history of the game (and I include Fergie in that) at developing attacking football.

Anyway I’m not saying he needs to go to Newcastle to challenge himself further before someone comes up with that but bloody hell spending half a billion in five years on just defensive players is a massive massive advantage and one not afforded to any other club or manager elsewhere.

 

[GaryLifo]

Presumably that’s because you see Liverpool beating City at Anfield, City dropping points in other games and Liverpool winning all theirs?
All this may happen but all of those things are open to considerable doubt.

I see City dropping 2 points at Burnley this week. Liverpool will beat Brighton by 3 goals. City will lose at Anfield I'm almost certain. I think you'll beat Spurs then drop more points away at Arsenal.

Liverpool will win all 4 of their next matches.

 

[golden_blunder]

I see City dropping 2 points at Burnley this week. Liverpool will beat Brighton by 3 goals. City will lose at Anfield I'm almost certain. I think you'll beat Spurs then drop more points away at Arsenal.

Liverpool will win all 4 of their next matches.

Thanks for depressing me Gary

 

[GaryLifo]

Thanks for depressing me Gary

Believe me... I feel the same. Sigh

 

[KiD MoYeS]

It is City's to throw away. I appreciate preparing for the worst but I don't see Liverpool winning their next four. Tottenham and West Ham were mostly useless in their games against Liverpool, their next few opponents will surely perform better.

 

[padr81]

Delph was your mainstay lb because 50 million Mendy got injured and 25 million Danilo couldn’t cut it. Hasnt Zinchenko only been playing since Walker and Ake had injuries ? Anyway I digress.

I don’t think anyone thinks Pep should have just kept what he inherited all these years but @Sylar points out it’s that he’s been able to bring in a catalogue of defenders for incredible fees to get it right. And anyone who’s not delivered had been written off easily and another expensive one brought in. These are staggering advantages which although @footballistic orgasm claims other big/rich clubs have too, is simply not the case.

Pep has been at city since 2016 and these are the defensive players he’s been able to bring in.
Stones 50
Bravo 16
Ederson 35
Walker 45
Danilo 26
Mendy 50
Laporte 57
Rodri 63
Cancelo 60
Ake 40
Dias 62

That is almost half a billion pounds.

In the same time Klopp had had this defensive investment.
Matip free
Klavan 4
Karius 5
Robertson 8
Van Dijk 75
Fabinho 39
Alison 55
Tsimikas 12

198 million.

Man United in that same period have invested about 250 million in their defence. Chelsea about 350 million. Not even gonna bother with Spurs and Arsenal. It’d barely cross triple figures.

So it’s pretty clear Pep is working with resources on a different planet to most managers. And I think city fans need to accept it will always be something mentioned. To basically be allowed 100 million on average every summer JUST to bring in defensive players is pretty staggering. City could lose Stones and Dias to injury and theyd bring in 100 million worth of cover. Liverpool are having to play midfielders and rookies in defence. It also allows you to rotate your defenders more, which you have been doing a lot, again this is a massive advantage Pep has.

On the flip side of this, he hasn’t spent that much on attackers relative to what he’s spent on defence. Partly of course due to you having the talent there already but also because he excels more than any manager probably in the history of the game (and I include Fergie in that) at developing attacking football.

Anyway I’m not saying he needs to go to Newcastle to challenge himself further before someone comes up with that but bloody hell spending half a billion in five years on just defensive players is a massive massive advantage and one not afforded to any other club or manager elsewhere.

For shits and giggles I thought I'd do the actual math.
Since you are counting defensive mids as defenders too, in they go.

Dias 61.2
Ake 40.77
Cancelo 58.5
Rodri 56.43
Angelino 10.5
Sandler 2.25
Laporte 58.5
Mendy 51.75
Walker 47.43
Ederson 36
Danilo 27
Douglas Luiz 10.8
Stones 50.04
Bravo 16.2
Zinchenko 1.9
Yan Couto 5.4

Puts City at £534.67m. Obscene amount of money to be honest.

Telles - 13.5m
Maguire - 78.3
Wan Bissaka - 49.5
Fred 53.1 (if we're counting Rodri and Fabinho in here, I'm gonna laugh at anyone who says he's box to box as he never leaves your half and Rodri spends far more time attacking than him.)
Dalot 19.8
Matic 40.23
Lindelof 31.5
Bailly 34.2

Puts United closer to £320 million by transfermarkt's reckoning. Obscene amount of money too, especially comparing the relative quality of both squads defences.

Tsimikas 11.7
van Den Berg 1.7
Alisson 56.25
Fabinho 40.5
Van Dijk 76.19
Robertson 8.1 (possibly the best transfer in PL history that one, what a deal that one was).
Klavan 4.5
Karius 5.58

Puts the Pool on £204.52 million. Best bang for the buck by a considerable distance.

Chilwell 41.58
Mendy 21.6
Kepa 72 (the transfer that maybe prevents Mendy *the City one* from being the worst transfer of all time)
Jorginho 51.3
Bakayoko 36
Rudiger 31.5
Zappacosta 22.5
Emerson 18
Ampadu 2.52
Luis 31.5
Kante 32.22
Alonso 20.7

Great estimate on Chelsea who have spent £349.65 million on defensive players in the same time frame. I genuinely didn't realize they'd spent more than liverpool.

I would say sorting those in order of bang for the buck.
Liverpool>>>>>City>>Chelsea>United. Chelsea's being rated slightly higher than Uniteds because their early signings won a league title by a landslide.

All prices are from transfermarkt.co.uk before people accuse me of all sorts.

 

[La Pulga]

City are in insane form currently that John Stones has scored more goals than he conceded while playing for City this season. To put it into perspective, Stones equaled Martial's EPL scoring tally this season in One half vs Crystal Palace.

 

[Sylar]

Presumably that’s because you see Liverpool beating City at Anfield, City dropping points in other games and Liverpool winning all theirs?
All this may happen but all of those things are open to considerable doubt.

Again, everthing you said goes to my point and in fact you are agreeing with me. So I don't get what the issue is with what I said?

Hard for Nathan to be starting when he's constantly injured.

I get that
But you're making my point
It's the fact you can spend 40m and not worry if he's injured or not.

I mean @Gentleman Jim kinda phrased it that he might have replaced Stones who was in bad form. How many other teams can do this? A lot of people thought he was a flop before his return run in the team

Pep has that advantage to get somebody in if it doesn't work out which goes to my point
He can invest until he gets it right

He's been afforded the same luxury that "top coaches" in other big/rich clubs are been offered.

You said he came in and finished 3rd with the defenders he had and then bought 5 players in his defence line, that's true but you forgot to mention that the defenders he had that season were already in their thirties and some very injury prone. Offcourse he had to get new younger defenders who also fits the kind of football he wanted his team to play.

How many in this league are allowed to get all the replacements in one window as well as other purchases for the squad / first team?

I know they were in their 30s. As was some of the converted wingers that ole had to work with. If your arguement is that he's not a top coach, then Jose before him had the same issue
City clearly have an advantage.And some were before the boom of Neymar no?

I don't get why City fans seem to take it as an insult

 

[footballistic orgasm]

Pep has that advantage to get somebody in if it doesn't work out which goes to my point
He can invest until he gets it right

How many in this league are allowed to get all the replacements in one window as well as other purchases for the squad / first team?

I know they were in their 30s. As was some of the converted wingers that ole had to work with. If your arguement is that he's not a top coach, then Jose before him had the same issue
City clearly have an advantage.And some were before the boom of Neymar no?

I don't get why City fans seem to take it as an insult

The only player Pep replaced instantly was Bravo when he got Ederson to replace him the next season.

Like i said earlier, every other rich/big team has the same ability in the transfer market to buy players (should the players be willing to come also offcourse). How's it Pep's fault if these clubs refuse to get some of the players available to them? That's on the other rich clubs.

We were talking about defenders in their 30s (which is why he replaced them) and all of a sudden, you shifted the goal post and started talking about converted wingers.
You know damn well it's not the same thing. A young converted winger already naturally has a lot more technical abilities that can fit into Pep's system at the back (Zinchenko is a good examples, Delph too).
The defenders in their 30s that were sold in his 2nd season were clearly passed their best and were never technical enough even at their best to play the kind of football Pep likes to make his teams play.

 

[Sylar]

The only player Pep replaced instantly was Bravo when he got Ederson to replace him the next season.

Like i said earlier, every other rich/big team has the same ability in the transfer market to buy players (should the players be willing to come also offcourse). How's it Pep's fault if these clubs refuse to get some of the players available to them? That's on the other rich clubs.

We were talking about defenders in their 30s (which is why he replaced them) and all of a sudden, you shifted the goal post and started talking about converted wingers.
You know damn well it's not the same thing. A young converted winger already naturally has a lot more technical abilities that can fit into Pep's system at the back (Zinchenko is a good examples, Delph too).
The defenders in their 30s that were sold in his 2nd season were clearly passed their best and were never technical enough even at their best to play the kind of football Pep likes to make his teams play.

You're taking this too personally it seems

Again, I didn't say it's Peps fault, read my posts again as you're getting too involved in this? Or missing what I'm saying

And Other clubs aren't refusing to just pay Willy Nilly like City. Surely you can understand why City are even considered a big club or a CL club now, and it's because of the advantages afforded to Pep that few others have (PSG another example and Chelsea before that)
I would like to know which other clubs can spend like city though

The converted wingers was an example not the point but you're making it the point for the sake of defending Peps spending?

United probably make more than any other club (defo much more than city despite being trash for 7 years) yet can't spend the same like City for a reason (part of it is the owners sure)

 

[SportingCP96]

I just want to say I was wrong about Ruben Dias.

I did not think he can be a top defender at a champion caliber team and I was wrong. He has been immense for City and I'm glad because Portugal have a leader in the backline for the next 15 years.

 

[CityBlue123]

Delph was your mainstay lb because 50 million Mendy got injured and 25 million Danilo couldn’t cut it. Hasnt Zinchenko only been playing since Walker and Ake had injuries ? Anyway I digress.

I don’t think anyone thinks Pep should have just kept what he inherited all these years but @Sylar points out it’s that he’s been able to bring in a catalogue of defenders for incredible fees to get it right. And anyone who’s not delivered had been written off easily and another expensive one brought in. These are staggering advantages which although @footballistic orgasm claims other big/rich clubs have too, is simply not the case.

Pep has been at city since 2016 and these are the defensive players he’s been able to bring in.
Stones 50
Bravo 16
Ederson 35
Walker 45
Danilo 26
Mendy 50
Laporte 57
Rodri 63
Cancelo 60
Ake 40
Dias 62

That is almost half a billion pounds.

In the same time Klopp had had this defensive investment.
Matip free
Klavan 4
Karius 5
Robertson 8
Van Dijk 75
Fabinho 39
Alison 55
Tsimikas 12

198 million.

Man United in that same period have invested about 250 million in their defence. Chelsea about 350 million. Not even gonna bother with Spurs and Arsenal. It’d barely cross triple figures.

So it’s pretty clear Pep is working with resources on a different planet to most managers. And I think city fans need to accept it will always be something mentioned. To basically be allowed 100 million on average every summer JUST to bring in defensive players is pretty staggering. City could lose Stones and Dias to injury and theyd bring in 100 million worth of cover. Liverpool are having to play midfielders and rookies in defence. It also allows you to rotate your defenders more, which you have been doing a lot, again this is a massive advantage Pep has.

On the flip side of this, he hasn’t spent that much on attackers relative to what he’s spent on defence. Partly of course due to you having the talent there already but also because he excels more than any manager probably in the history of the game (and I include Fergie in that) at developing attacking football.

Anyway I’m not saying he needs to go to Newcastle to challenge himself further before someone comes up with that but bloody hell spending half a billion in five years on just defensive players is a massive massive advantage and one not afforded to any other club or manager elsewhere.

1) Delph being a mainstay when Mendy was injured quite literally goes against the idea that Pep spends and just replaces players he doesn't like. Zinchenko being our main LB 4 years after signing Mendy also points that out. Danilo did cut it, just left because he wanted more minutes and to be a regular hence why he was moved on. Literally only Bravo was replaced and he became our 2nd choice keeper for years. So your point that 'anyone who’s not delivered had been written off easily and another expensive one brought in' is totally wrong and not backed up. If it had been the case we have bought in an actual LB years ago.

Like you stated, we have spent far more on defence that midfield and attack. United *could* spend that much on defence but it wouldn't be prudent of them as they have other needs that need addressing. People use the defensive spending (which was a function of the terrible squad management prior to Pep's arrival) to act as a rule of thumb for the rest of our squad. Our spending, under Pep, is only marginally more than United's in the same period while having a consistently higher wage bill but the fortunes of both sides have been totally different.

 

[footballistic orgasm]

You're taking this too personally it seems

Again, I didn't say it's Peps fault, read my posts again as you're getting too involved in this? Or missing what I'm saying

And Other clubs aren't refusing to just pay Willy Nilly like City. Surely you can understand why City are even considered a big club or a CL club now, and it's because of the advantages afforded to Pep that few others have (PSG another example and Chelsea before that)
I would like to know which other clubs can spend like city though

The converted wingers was an example not the point but you're making it the point for the sake of defending Peps spending?

United probably make more than any other club (defo much more than city despite being trash for 7 years) yet can't spend the same like City for a reason (part of it is the owners sure)

Because the owners don't want to, not because they can't, that has been my point and that has nothing to do with Pep.

The converted wingers is a whole lot different from ageing defenders, so i don't understand why you brought it up as an example when it doesn't hold the same weight or even close at all.

As for which clubs can spend like city in the PL: United, Chelsea and even Arsenal can, what they chose to do is another issue.
The players have to be willing to come too, which is another issue. And besides I don't think they've spent over 70M on any single player if i'm correct...

Why will I take any of this personal? i like Pep the coach but I don't know him personally. I'm just pointing out the holes in your arguments, nothing personal.

 

[Ludens the Red]

1) Delph being a mainstay when Mendy was injured quite literally goes against the idea that Pep spends and just replaces players he doesn't like. Zinchenko being our main LB 4 years after signing Mendy also points that out. Danilo did cut it, just left because he wanted more minutes and to be a regular hence why he was moved on. Literally only Bravo was replaced and he became our 2nd choice keeper for years. So your point that 'anyone who’s not delivered had been written off easily and another expensive one brought in' is totally wrong and not backed up. If it had been the case we have bought in an actual LB years ago.

Like you stated, we have spent far more on defence that midfield and attack. United *could* spend that much on defence but it wouldn't be prudent of them as they have other needs that need addressing. People use the defensive spending (which was a function of the terrible squad management prior to Pep's arrival) to act as a rule of thumb for the rest of our squad. Our spending, under Pep, is only marginally more than United's in the same period while having a consistently higher wage bill but the fortunes of both sides have been totally different.

It doesn't go against the idea, all it means is the guy you spent money on got injured, it doesn't negate the advantage or the resources at hand or the fact he was still bought.
‘Totally wrong and not backed up’??
I mean really? You signed Otamendi and Mangala for about 60 million before Pep came in. He came in and added 50 million John Stones after deciding Mangala wasnt good enough and he was loaned out. You then decided actually Stones wasn't good enough and then bought Laporte for 57 million. Stones was sat on the bench for a good 18 months and then Dias was brought in for 60 million and Ake for 40 million before you guys decided actually Stones is good enough and he was brought back into the picture. Then we look at the full back situation. There is no club out there who have been able to spend 200 million on full backs since 2017, this is something you were able to do.

United's spending has been atrocious, paying too much money for dog shit for years, wages and transfers, won't catch me denying that but 'Marginally more' Your spend is about 150 million more since Pep arrived. 150 million can get you a Ruben Dias and Aymeric Laporte and still have left over change, so I assure you that is not marginal difference, it is potentially two top class players. And we have not had a 'consistently higher wage bill', it was only from our signing of Sanchez in 2018 that ours became higher.

For shits and giggles I thought I'd do the actual math.
Since you are counting defensive mids as defenders too, in they go.

Dias 61.2
Ake 40.77
Cancelo 58.5
Rodri 56.43
Angelino 10.5
Sandler 2.25
Laporte 58.5
Mendy 51.75
Walker 47.43
Ederson 36
Danilo 27
Douglas Luiz 10.8
Stones 50.04
Bravo 16.2
Zinchenko 1.9
Yan Couto 5.4

Puts City at £534.67m. Obscene amount of money to be honest.

Telles - 13.5m
Maguire - 78.3
Wan Bissaka - 49.5
Fred 53.1 (if we're counting Rodri and Fabinho in here, I'm gonna laugh at anyone who says he's box to box as he never leaves your half and Rodri spends far more time attacking than him.)
Dalot 19.8
Matic 40.23
Lindelof 31.5
Bailly 34.2

Puts United closer to £320 million by transfermarkt's reckoning. Obscene amount of money too, especially comparing the relative quality of both squads defences.

Tsimikas 11.7
van Den Berg 1.7
Alisson 56.25
Fabinho 40.5
Van Dijk 76.19
Robertson 8.1 (possibly the best transfer in PL history that one, what a deal that one was).
Klavan 4.5
Karius 5.58

Puts the Pool on £204.52 million. Best bang for the buck by a considerable distance.

Chilwell 41.58
Mendy 21.6
Kepa 72 (the transfer that maybe prevents Mendy *the City one* from being the worst transfer of all time)
Jorginho 51.3
Bakayoko 36
Rudiger 31.5
Zappacosta 22.5
Emerson 18
Ampadu 2.52
Luis 31.5
Kante 32.22
Alonso 20.7

Great estimate on Chelsea who have spent £349.65 million on defensive players in the same time frame. I genuinely didn't realize they'd spent more than liverpool.

I would say sorting those in order of bang for the buck.
Liverpool>>>>>City>>Chelsea>United. Chelsea's being rated slightly higher than Uniteds because their early signings won a league title by a landslide.

All prices are from transfermarkt.co.uk before people accuse me of all sorts.

Haha, Ill give you Fred but I assure you he was not brought in as a defensive midfielder. I didnt add all those little 2/3 million transfers here and there which is probably why figures are slightly off but obviously not by much.

 

[Pep's Suit]

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Every City / Pep / Messi thread here is moving in circles.

 

[Sylar]

Because the owners don't want to, not because they can't, that has been my point and that has nothing to do with Pep.

The converted wingers is a whole lot different from ageing defenders, so i don't understand why you brought it up as an example when it doesn't hold the same weight or even close at all.

As for which clubs can spend like city in the PL: United, Chelsea and even Arsenal can, what they chose to do is another issue.
The players have to be willing to come too, which is another issue. And besides I don't think they've spent over 70M on any single player if i'm correct...

Why will I take any of this personal? i like Pep the coach but I don't know him personally. I'm just pointing out the holes in your arguments, nothing personal.

Because the converted wingers were 30+
How are you not realising the point?
Forget the point converted wingers because for some reason you're stuck on that
The point remains, United had aging players too

And yes the owners don't want to and there's a reason Pep went to City cos he knew they would there.
Arsenal and United won't because they are different. Do you really think any manager will come here knowing they have unlimited funds?
and do you think any manager will go to city and believe they are restricted?

City are different than almost all teams. Pep didn't go there and then strike it lucky with being able to buy players, part of the reason he went there is because he knew he would be able.

Again, this isnt a shot at Pep, I think he's a fantastic coach. But again, he has a huge advantage over other managers. He's not working at the same level playing field as others in terms of squad building and maintaining

 

[padr81]

It doesn't go against the idea, all it means is the guy you spent money on got injured, it doesn't negate the advantage or the resources at hand or the fact he was still bought.
‘Totally wrong and not backed up’??
I mean really? You signed Otamendi and Mangala for about 60 million before Pep came in. He came in and added 50 million John Stones after deciding Mangala wasnt good enough and he was loaned out. You then decided actually Stones wasn't good enough and then bought Laporte for 57 million. Stones was sat on the bench for a good 18 months and then Dias was brought in for 60 million and Ake for 40 million before you guys decided actually Stones is good enough and he was brought back into the picture. Then we look at the full back situation. There is no club out there who have been able to spend 200 million on full backs since 2017, this is something you were able to do.

United's spending has been atrocious, paying too much money for dog shit for years, wages and transfers, won't catch me denying that but 'Marginally more' Your spend is about 150 million more since Pep arrived. 150 million can get you a Ruben Dias and Aymeric Laporte and still have left over change, so I assure you that is not marginal difference, it is potentially two top class players. And we have not had a 'consistently higher wage bill', it was only from our signing of Sanchez in 2018 that ours became higher.



Haha, Ill give you Fred but I assure you he was not brought in as a defensive midfielder. I didnt add all those little 2/3 million transfers here and there which is probably why figures are slightly off but obviously not by much.

Yeah man, for off the top of your head, they were pretty good, the Chelsea one kinda shocked me. I was like "How the feck did Chelsea spend £350m on defenders, I barely recall any" then I looked and I was shocked.

 

[padr81]

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Every City / Pep / Messi thread here is moving in circles.

Every football discussion ever moves in circles in fairness.

 

[tomaldinho1]

Every football discussion ever moves in circles in fairness.

Bebe's performance thread didn't

 

[CityBlue123]

It doesn't go against the idea, all it means is the guy you spent money on got injured, it doesn't negate the advantage or the resources at hand or the fact he was still bought.
‘Totally wrong and not backed up’??
I mean really? You signed Otamendi and Mangala for about 60 million before Pep came in. He came in and added 50 million John Stones after deciding Mangala wasnt good enough and he was loaned out. You then decided actually Stones wasn't good enough and then bought Laporte for 57 million. Stones was sat on the bench for a good 18 months and then Dias was brought in for 60 million and Ake for 40 million before you guys decided actually Stones is good enough and he was brought back into the picture. Then we look at the full back situation. There is no club out there who have been able to spend 200 million on full backs since 2017, this is something you were able to do.

United's spending has been atrocious, paying too much money for dog shit for years, wages and transfers, won't catch me denying that but 'Marginally more' Your spend is about 150 million more since Pep arrived. 150 million can get you a Ruben Dias and Aymeric Laporte and still have left over change, so I assure you that is not marginal difference, it is potentially two top class players. And we have not had a 'consistently higher wage bill', it was only from our signing of Sanchez in 2018 that ours became higher.



Haha, Ill give you Fred but I assure you he was not brought in as a defensive midfielder. I didnt add all those little 2/3 million transfers here and there which is probably why figures are slightly off but obviously not by much.

I'm not going to lie, you've stated alot of things that are just not true.

1) Laporte was not bought to replace Stones, they literally don't even play in the same position. Laporte has played exclusively as a LCB and Stones as a RCB. Mangala wasn't a Pep signing but has a PL medal. Same as Otamendi who made PFA TOTS. These were pre-Pep signings that we all know aren't good enough but Pep worked with them and gave them their highest footballing peaks in terms of honours.

2) A club can spent 200m on fullbacks (which isn't accurate btw) if they choose to neglect other areas of the pitch. United have only spent marginally less than City since Pep arrived. According to transfermrkt.com, the total figure is 67m. What's also very important about that figure is that it includes many of City's CFG signings and discounts some of the sales of youth players such as Felix Correria who was sold for 9m but comes under the Man City U23 category. So yes, it is marginal. Also transfer fees don't include the ridiculous wages you've offered as part of 'free signings' such as Sanchez and Cavani.

So it's not a case of Pep having more resources than everyone in the league, we've just used our resources better than our rivals and the mention of our defensive spend is just a deflection to counter how we've used our resources more efficiently than clubs like United.
I'm not going to lie, you've stated alot of things that are just not true.

1) Laporte was not bought to replace Stones, they literally don't even play in the same position. Laporte has played exclusively as a LCB and Stones as a RCB. Mangala wasn't a Pep signing but has a PL medal. Same as Otamendi who made PFA TOTS. These were pre-Pep signings that we all know aren't good enough but Pep worked with them and gave them their highest footballing peaks in terms of honours.

2) A club can spent 200m on fullbacks (which isn't accurate btw) if they choose to neglect other areas of the pitch. United have only spent marginally less than City since Pep arrived. According to transfermrkt.com, the total figure is 67m. What's also very important about that figure is that it includes many of City's CFG signings and discounts some of the sales of youth players such as Felix Correria who was sold for 9m but comes under the Man City U23 category. So yes, it is marginal. Also transfer fees don't include the ridiculous wages you've offered as part of 'free signings' such as Sanchez and Cavani.

So it's not a case of Pep having more resources than everyone in the league, we've just used our resources better than our rivals and the mention of our defensive spend is just a deflection to counter how we've used our resources more efficiently than clubs like United.

 

[padr81]

Bebe's performance thread didn't

100% positive I presume.

 

[Main Road]

It doesn't go against the idea, all it means is the guy you spent money on got injured, it doesn't negate the advantage or the resources at hand or the fact he was still bought.
‘Totally wrong and not backed up’??
I mean really? You signed Otamendi and Mangala for about 60 million before Pep came in. He came in and added 50 million John Stones after deciding Mangala wasnt good enough and he was loaned out. You then decided actually Stones wasn't good enough and then bought Laporte for 57 million. Stones was sat on the bench for a good 18 months and then Dias was brought in for 60 million and Ake for 40 million before you guys decided actually Stones is good enough and he was brought back into the picture. Then we look at the full back situation. There is no club out there who have been able to spend 200 million on full backs since 2017, this is something you were able to do.

United's spending has been atrocious, paying too much money for dog shit for years, wages and transfers, won't catch me denying that but 'Marginally more' Your spend is about 150 million more since Pep arrived. 150 million can get you a Ruben Dias and Aymeric Laporte and still have left over change, so I assure you that is not marginal difference, it is potentially two top class players. And we have not had a 'consistently higher wage bill', it was only from our signing of Sanchez in 2018 that ours became higher.



Haha, Ill give you Fred but I assure you he was not brought in as a defensive midfielder. I didnt add all those little 2/3 million transfers here and there which is probably why figures are slightly off but obviously not by much.

Danilo was signed after city won the league with 100 points with Delph playing left back

 

[tomaldinho1]

100% positive I presume.

Unequivocally

 

[Gentleman Jim]

I see City dropping 2 points at Burnley this week. Liverpool will beat Brighton by 3 goals. City will lose at Anfield I'm almost certain. I think you'll beat Spurs then drop more points away at Arsenal.

Liverpool will win all 4 of their next matches.

Euro millions numbers for Friday are?

 

[Gentleman Jim]

@Sylar posted

Again, everthing you said goes to my point and in fact you are agreeing with me. So I don't get what the issue is with what I said?

==========================



Actually the bit you quoted was my response to another poster who seems to know all the results of forthcoming games featuring closely matched teams.
If you reread my response my thoughts are in bold lettering inbetween your remarks.

 

[Sylar]

@Sylar posted

Again, everthing you said goes to my point and in fact you are agreeing with me. So I don't get what the issue is with what I said?

==========================



Actually the bit you quoted was my response to another poster who seems to know all the results of forthcoming games featuring closely matched teams.
If you reread my response my thoughts are in bold lettering inbetween your remarks.

Yeah re read and see I totally fudged it up

Regardless, please tell pep to ensure city drop points
Unless Liverpool can overtake then don't.

 

[DoneDaDa]

You're taking this too personally it seems

Again, I didn't say it's Peps fault, read my posts again as you're getting too involved in this? Or missing what I'm saying

And Other clubs aren't refusing to just pay Willy Nilly like City. Surely you can understand why City are even considered a big club or a CL club now, and it's because of the advantages afforded to Pep that few others have (PSG another example and Chelsea before that)
I would like to know which other clubs can spend like city though

The converted wingers was an example not the point but you're making it the point for the sake of defending Peps spending?

United probably make more than any other club (defo much more than city despite being trash for 7 years) yet can't spend the same like City for a reason (part of it is the owners sure)

Oil clubs like City, Chelsea and PSG have done damage to the game, however this statement your making is totally untrue. All big clubs can spend like City and many have. 3-peat RM team had James, Bale, Isco, Morata at one point on their bench, even current RM have about 3 players each who cost 50m sitting on their bench. I also note that RM from 2004-2014 spendt a billion in the transfer window, Mou RM at the time was the most expensive squad assembled. Bayern Munich last season had Coutinho (loan I know, but he went for 140m), Tossilo who cost 40-50m and Pavard 35-40m on their bench. Barcelona over the years had plenty of 30-50m players on their bench as well. Oil clubs have impact teams like Arsenal, Liverpool, Spurs, Atleti, Dortmund, Milan and Inter in hurting their progress, more then they did clubs like United, Barcelona, RM, Bayern or Juve. Maybe not so much Juve, but the rest can compete with them on a financial level the only issue for the elites are competition for players with these clubs now also invovled for top draw signings. Your club has beaten City to Maguire, Sanchez and Fred signings, Barcelona beat them to de Jong and Juve for de Ligt, City wanted Isco before Bernado, but RM still kept a hold of him despite him no being a starter per say, Bayern took Sane from them. Its utter bollocks to say the elites can't compete.

When Pep came to City first, he had aged and past it full back, he couldn't just replace them right away, because they had to offload them when most their contract run out and they were sold did he splash on full back, last season City couldn't buy a CB because they were over the foreign rule policy and they had to offload Ote as well. Cancelo deal lingered on Danilo going the opposite way, if Juve didn't accept they would've still had Danilo. City was close to ending this summer window with only Ake as a CB signing it's only when Benfica got KO'ed from CL and Dias price dropped and Benfica were willing to take Ote for 15m did they get the deal through which was partially luck, City didn't want to splash 80m on KK or 90m on Kounde, even in the All or Nothing we saw Mubarak (I think thats his name) and Txiki speaking about Van Dijk before Liverpool move and deeming 75m too expensive for him, so no they don't have an unlimited budget, or at least want to spend within a means it seems. I'm not saying they can't spend money, but to say they don't have any limitation or restriction is further from the turth.

 

[Noot]

Delph was your mainstay lb because 50 million Mendy got injured and 25 million Danilo couldn’t cut it. Hasnt Zinchenko only been playing since Walker and Ake had injuries ? Anyway I digress.

I don’t think anyone thinks Pep should have just kept what he inherited all these years but @Sylar points out it’s that he’s been able to bring in a catalogue of defenders for incredible fees to get it right. And anyone who’s not delivered had been written off easily and another expensive one brought in. These are staggering advantages which although @footballistic orgasm claims other big/rich clubs have too, is simply not the case.

Pep has been at city since 2016 and these are the defensive players he’s been able to bring in.
Stones 50
Bravo 16
Ederson 35
Walker 45
Danilo 26
Mendy 50
Laporte 57
Rodri 63
Cancelo 60
Ake 40
Dias 62

That is almost half a billion pounds.

In the same time Klopp had had this defensive investment.
Matip free
Klavan 4
Karius 5
Robertson 8
Van Dijk 75
Fabinho 39
Alison 55
Tsimikas 12

198 million.

Man United in that same period have invested about 250 million in their defence. Chelsea about 350 million. Not even gonna bother with Spurs and Arsenal. It’d barely cross triple figures.

So it’s pretty clear Pep is working with resources on a different planet to most managers. And I think city fans need to accept it will always be something mentioned. To basically be allowed 100 million on average every summer JUST to bring in defensive players is pretty staggering. City could lose Stones and Dias to injury and theyd bring in 100 million worth of cover. Liverpool are having to play midfielders and rookies in defence. It also allows you to rotate your defenders more, which you have been doing a lot, again this is a massive advantage Pep has.

On the flip side of this, he hasn’t spent that much on attackers relative to what he’s spent on defence. Partly of course due to you having the talent there already but also because he excels more than any manager probably in the history of the game (and I include Fergie in that) at developing attacking football.

Anyway I’m not saying he needs to go to Newcastle to challenge himself further before someone comes up with that but bloody hell spending half a billion in five years on just defensive players is a massive massive advantage and one not afforded to any other club or manager elsewhere.

From my massively biased point of view, please allow me to offer some counter-points to a few of your arguments:

Danilo was never a LB, and that was apparent from the first time he played in that position. He always looked deeply uncomfortable playing from the left. I feel bad for him because, when he signed, the club tried to sell him to the fans as someone who could play in either full-back position, but he wasn't capable of it. Pep's teams really need a left-footed left-back, and anyone else is really just a stop-gap. I think we've learned that lesson now as it looks like we've stopped trying Cancelo there as well.

Zinchenko's actually played in just under half of our league games since his introduction to the team halfway through the 17/18 season. Usually, when we go on a good run of form, he's playing at LB. He doesn't get talked about much in the media or by rival fans but I don't think it's a coincidence that we've started winning games again since we stopped trying Cancelo and Mendy at LB and just put Zinchenko in there.

You make a point about Pep simply replacing anyone who doesn't deliver, but I don't think that's true. Stones was awful for two years, Pep stuck with him and now he's back in the team looking great. Cancelo was absolutely terrible last season, Pep stuck with him and now he's back in the team looking great. Where most people said Rodri was never going to work here after a rocky first season, Pep stuck with him and now he's back in the team looking great. He's also turned an unknown Ukranian attacking midfielder into one of the better full-backs in the league. He does coach these players and improve them, where he can. I think Bravo and Mendy are the only unquestioned flops on your list, but I don't know that anyone could have predicted Bravo's decline or Mendy's injury problems. And we never have directly replaced Mendy either, instead trying to fit five or six different square pegs into that round hole rather than spend money on a replacement.

 

[robinamicrowave]

I see City dropping 2 points at Burnley this week. Liverpool will beat Brighton by 3 goals. City will lose at Anfield I'm almost certain. I think you'll beat Spurs then drop more points away at Arsenal.

Liverpool will win all 4 of their next matches.

Good start.

 

[Robbie Boy]

They're back to their machine-like best.

 

[DoneDaDa]

They will either draw or lose the game at Anfield. Feels like Pep will go hoping for a draw or Mane/Salah will pulling something off and score.

 

[GhastlyHun]

Exact 3:1 ratio of goals scored and conceded.

 

[edcunited1878]

City have been very efficient and full of 'professional displays' this year. You can't score without the ball and they've adopted a better defensive shape and discipline, yet they are able to attack quickly and with purpose. And they don't make dumb mistakes on the ball that compromise their shape like losing possession in the middle of the park when their backline is totally exposed.

A very good balance of technical and composed players on the ball across the pitch, yet direct and penetrative towards goal. But all of Pep's teams have great spatial awareness and understanding how to manipulate space to create space and chances around the pitch.

 

[SER19]

They will either draw or lose the game at Anfield. Feels like Pep will go hoping for a draw or Mane/Salah will pulling something off and score.

Need them to lose to keep it interesting. I know that increases the chance of us finishing behind Liverpool but if they win that they'll pull away


Shame they've had such easy cup draws across all competitions. Fixture congestion not an issue really

 

[footballistic orgasm]

Need them to lose to keep it interesting. I know that increases the chance of us finishing behind Liverpool but if they win that they'll pull away


Shame they've had such easy cup draws across all competitions. Fixture congestion not an issue really

Didn't they beat United in one of those cup draws though ?

 

[DoneDaDa]

Need them to lose to keep it interesting. I know that increases the chance of us finishing behind Liverpool but if they win that they'll pull away


Shame they've had such easy cup draws across all competitions. Fixture congestion not an issue really

I feel they will drop points in their current fixtures which is Pool, Spurs and Arsenal.

they still have United, Chelsea, Aston Villa (away), Wolves and Everton x2. They’re going to face a fixture congestion later on its going to depend on how close United or Pool are at that time. However at the moment they have too many players being in the form of their lives.

 

[padr81]

I feel they will drop points in their current fixtures which is Pool, Spurs and Arsenal.

they still have United, Chelsea, Aston Villa (away), Wolves and Everton x2. They’re going to face a fixture congestion later on its going to depend on how close United or Pool are at that time. However at the moment they have too many players being in the form of their lives.

Weirdly we have no one in the form of their lives bar maybe a couple of defenders. Sterlings been off, Jesus hit and miss, Mahrez off, Bernardo coming back to form, Gundogan in his best form at City but not at his Dortmund best, Rodri better.but not his Atletico peak. Laporte has been shocking since his injury. I'd make the argument that Stones was this good in the first half of our 100 point season too but fell off a cliff afterwards. Just playing a system that works right now.

 

[SER19]

Didn't they beat United in one of those cup draws though ?

Yeah. Much more likely to face good teams at a semi final stage, incredibly rare not to.

Not to mention I'm talking mostly about draws at this stage of the season where congestion is occurring.

 

[Adisa]

Looking like three titles in four years for these feckers.

 

[SalfordRed18]

Can't see them dropping enough points to let anyone have a sniff at the title.

Least it's city and nobody cares