By little I mean the PL has already blown most of the rest of the footballing world away in terms of finance, the oil clubs just pushed a little further.
So by just a little you mean like Chelsea when they doubled every single offer to get their players? Or Pep with his 1bn spent, or PSG with the Neymar signing and signing both Real's and Barca's iconic captains in the same window.. If that's little I don't want to see big.
As sad as it is, it will only get worse.
Exactly, always makes me laugh when football fans hide behind moral codes.
Investors are good to break the monopoly of the conventional big clubs. We need more man city, psg, Chelsea, villa, everton, Leicester investors. If spurs has a new investor (not the American) they will probably break into top 4 already.
EPL fans on one hand mock the lack of competition in other leagues while also complaining about the same thing that brought competition to the EPL. Foreign money from "dubious" sources
Without these City, Chelsea PSG type sponsors, how would you ever get the level playing field, A regular investor will care about profit and most likely run it like Kroenke while the Madrid Bayern Man Utd Juve maintain their advantage they got over the past 30yrs
PSG is actually blowing the net spend argument away by assembling a team of world class players signed for free. Messi Wijnaldum Ramos Donarumma are all free but with huge wages
Chelsea used to spend like this too, After some time, City and PSG would have spent so much front end, built a brand and will not need to spend more. City already have 2 world class players per position now they will be able to sell one world class player for top dollars and replace with another ensuring low net spend. City can sell Bernardo and Jesus to some Chinese club now
Without "outside investment" Fergie wins every single title bar one from 1993 until retirement.
I mean it's possible to be financially responsible like Leicester and break the mold. Inter just won it with new managers who were financially responsible (until China fecked them up). You certainly don't need fake clubs to make leagues competitive. Also, obviously the playing field wouldn't be equal, but in football it never will be. I'd rather the system rewards intelligent, well run clubs, than lucky ones who are just toys to some random people who want to improve their public image. Also, as I eluded to in my post, we haven't seen the worst of the oil clubs yet. PSG, City, and Chelsea (not as bad as the other two) are both getting more bold with how much money they are spending. Not to mention they've been caught paying under the table as well so we don't know how much money they're actually spending.
Take it a step further and add a phenomena of fans growing up supporting individual players over clubs.
Leicester will be the random winner like Stuttgart and what happened to Leicester since then? The lost Mahrez, Kante Drinkwater Chilwell to other richer sides and have failed to make top 4 since that title win. Will you call that competition from leicester? Also Inter wont have won without those Chinese who fecked them
Yeah right, we haven't seen any top level football since 2003. Can you tell me what is the best and most competitive team after 2000 (and maybe in the history of football) according to most analysts/fans? Can you tell me how many CL titles have the "plastics" won since 2003?
Oh a PSG fan
Yup, your arguments are as deep as I thought. I've been a PSG supporter since George Weah, David Ginola and Rai. I've supported this club when we played with the likes of Grégory Bourillon, Amaré Diané and Apoula Edel. I don't really care if you think we do or don't have a place in football.
You support PSG
Half of those two (Messi, Ramos) are essentially luck, and neither of them has much fuel left in the tank anyway. Ramos has barely kicked a ball in 2021.
I remember PSG from the Ronaldinho days, and I used have a soft spot for the club. Nobody has a god given right to be successful, and I think it's fine for owners to invest in their teams, it's certainly better than sucking the money out of the club, I just don't think states should be able to own football clubs. It's just ridiculous and is done mainly to help clean their image. That's why a criminal like MIB is trying to buy Newcastle. Money is of no value to them, the Qatari regime bribed their way into hosting the world club, and PSG is just another piece in their portfolio, and now they have a lot of influence on european football.
Messi has enough in his tank to still be one of the 3 best players in the world for the duration of his PSG contracts and for free. Free transfers don't have to be luck, you can easily tap up top players whose contract are ending offering them big wages and pay 0 in transfer fee
The thing is, we, as PSG supporters, don't really appreciate being owned by Qatar. Sure a lot of people like the money they invested since we were close to being irrelevant when they purchased the club but we find no pride in being owned by a state. But that's the way it is and as i mentionned in the past, supporters don't choose their owners and eventually Qatar will leave and we'll still be in the arena. I can discuss the lack of virtue of massive cash injections with anyone with good arguments (I've supported a strong FFP for years) but i won't let anyone on a forum tell me that we have "no place in football", because i've lived amazing nights at the parc des princes years before QSI bought the club, and there was nothing plastic about it.
Ah the good old days that rarely ever happened. But you know that.
This is incorrect. Just because there is no transfer fee does not mean they were free. Not to mention that I highly doubt they went there to play in Ligue 1. Usually with no transfer fee there are more sign on bonuses to both player and agent. Reality is, they’ve actually spent a shit load.
I'm loving this new 2021 storytelling, as if it was almost more expensive to get players with no transfer fees than buying them from a club
it is just like saying net transfer spent is irrelevant, only the money spent on transfer matters. Money received from selling players is for accountant only.I'm loving this new 2021 storytelling, as if it was almost more expensive to get players with no transfer fees than buying them from a club
Don't get me wrong, i know there's sign on bonuses (even if it was reported by credible sources that Messi didn't have any but had season bonuses instead) but it's nowhere near the amount you'd spend if you were buying the player from a club.
I can see why @Crustanoid is upset. He supported United because of the glory and can't emotionally deal with other teams dating to challenge his.
See people think FFP doesn’t exist but it does these days just City spent before it was properly done and now with the TV money and their sponsors (probably their owners) they can spend a decent bit of money.
Football is ruined when other clubs have the same resource available to them as Man Utd. It is not allowed when the resource is coming from the investor. it doesn't matter if it comes from state or Abramovich. It is only allowed when the resource is generated by the club. so the traditional elite clubs can be competitive and stay monopoly in the league. It is only allowed when lots of money is invested in club like everton and leicester, but they can't challenge man utd yet. When they can, their owners ruin football too.
Even transfers where fees are paid, the agent and the player still get a signing bonus and when people count transfer fees, they don't count the agent and sign on fees
How many years in the 90's and 00's were United the biggest spenders?
