UnofficialDevil
Anti Scottish and Preoccupied with Donkeys.
One could easily start a thread called "Man Utd's Insane Spending" too..
Sold a bunch of academy talent for over £100m to fund the Lukaku move.How did Chelsea recoup the Lukaku 100m by loaning him?
I am talking about how they bought him last year. They sold a few players before buying him.How did Chelsea recoup the Lukaku 100m by loaning him?
Only because we/Cech somehow managed to find a world class keeper for peanuts (in this market) to offset it.Chelsea bought Kepa and dumped him on the bench
My workmate is Manchester born and bred.
The City success is mentally killing him. He says you see more kids running about wearing City tops than Utd now.
I really think this is a commentary we try to promote to lessen the pain of our failings.
And we will still be looking for a defensive midfielder in the next windowThe hilarious thing is we'll be having this exact same conversation about Newcastle in 10 years. Abu Dhabi FC vs. Saudi Arabia FC. Exciting stuff.
Have not seen a massive increase of people wearing City tops in Manchester.My workmate is Manchester born and bred.
The City success is mentally killing him. He says you see more kids running about wearing City tops than Utd now.
I really think this is a commentary we try to promote to lessen the pain of our failings.
what you on about here? If signing Lukaku for £100m and letting lots of talented academy plays leave the club is a display of a well run club….This. Same with Chelsea last year, they spent 100m on Lukaku but recouped the entire amount. We have not came out of any summer with profits from sales. We are poorly run and unfortunately the oil clubs have the money plus the right people making the football decisions.
And with rather more justification.One could easily start a thread called "Man Utd's Insane Spending" too..
….. and what?Uhm, yeah?
Their money was generated through corrupt sponsorship deals, ours wasn't.And with rather more justification.
Their spending has won them all of those trophies.
Ours, not so much...
So whose spending has been insane?
Really? From whom?This. Same with Chelsea last year, they spent 100m on Lukaku but recouped the entire amount. We have not came out of any summer with profits from sales. We are poorly run and unfortunately the oil clubs have the money plus the right people making the football decisions.
Sold Abraham, Guehi, Tomori, livramento etc to fund the Lukaku deal last year.Really? From whom?
Oh yeah, totally (well, almost totally) agree. I was talking only about the results of our respective spendings, not the sources of it. It all rather stinks in my opinion, but then that’s capitalism for you.Their money was generated through corrupt sponsorship deals, ours wasn't.
Of course he’s right.The La Liga president said after the Mbappe transfer that he doesn’t believe the true cost of the Haaland transfer would ever be reported. I have felt the same way for many years - the wages and sign-ons etc are private information. Who knows how much they are paying.
Chelsea winning the CL at 2021 has really given them a leeway to make bad signings and still largely escape criticism from media.Sold Abraham, Guehi, Tomori, livramento etc to fund the Lukaku deal last year.
Not recouped as you haven’t sold anyone this window but last season sold; Abraham, Zouma, Tomori, Guehi. Whilst academy players, they weren’t insignificant contributors and that only makes the deal look worse.Sold a bunch of academy talent for over £100m to fund the Lukaku move.
Probably helps further the argument your players are paid through another vehicleHe hasn’t signed a contract extension since December 2018. At which point he had played 136 minutes of premier league football. I know it sounds insanely low, but in this context it’s completely plausible.
100% on the money in terms of all parties you mention. This is the state of the game nowadays.Of course he’s right.
Haaland was a 150m player that required only 50 ish going to his club. You’re an absolute moron if you didn’t realise when he signed for Dortmund that was exactly Raiola’s plan. Just as was his ridiculously good Pogba > Juve deal yet massively multiplied.
His Dad knew it too.
It’s a win for City, the agent, the player and his Dad.
The agent and his Dad get paid tens of millions via City’s non footballing entities, the player will get the usual City double wage, and City get gullible as feck football fans believing they “play to the rules” and got him for just 50ish million.
Talksport this morning were saying about how he’s ‘only’ cost £51m and that money will be recouped from the sale of Sterling. It’s crazy how they get reported as efficient. There is no chance that a player of Haaland’s quality sold for £51m.Of course he’s right.
Haaland was a 150m player that required only 50 ish going to his club. You’re an absolute moron if you didn’t realise when he signed for Dortmund that was exactly Raiola’s plan. Just as was his ridiculously good Pogba > Juve deal yet massively multiplied.
His Dad knew it too.
It’s a win for City, the agent, the player and his Dad.
The agent and his Dad get paid tens of millions via City’s non footballing entities, the player will get the usual City double wage, and City get gullible as feck football fans believing they “play to the rules” and got him for just 50ish million.
That entire Dortmund deal was created by Raiola to maximise the profit for the agent, father and player. As the La Liga bloke says, we’ll never know but judging by the Mbappe deal, I’d be absolutely amazed if the entire package pre wages doesn’t ensure that Haaland, the agent and his Dad take the remainder of that 100m transfer spend “saving” that Raiola created.Talksport this morning were saying about how he’s ‘only’ cost £51m and that money will be recouped from the sale of Sterling. It’s crazy how they get reported as efficient. There is no chance that a player of Haaland’s quality sold for £51m.
I really don't get this ''well run club'' narrative. They would actually be Billions in debt if they were run as a self sustaining business, ergo they wouldn't exist at all.
It's right to say Abu Dhabi had a plan in place when they took over the club. The plan though was to copy the Barcelona model. It's not innovative thinking on their part.
To spend the sums City spend legitimately they would need to have a Global footprint. We are the biggest & most succesful club in England yet we can only dream of spending £300 Mill in a transfer window & spending £100 Mill on a bench warmer.
They will need 21 to overtake us.
how do you arrive at that figure?You're forgetting that Abu Dhabi is artificially inflating the commercial income by about £150m a year. Without that illegal support, the club would have collapsed into insolvency long ago.
That's not even including all the illegal activity that has come to light in the leaks about how the club has moved costs off the balance sheet (such as selling worthless image rights to a connected company for tens of millions or employing the manager as a "tourism ambassador" without requiring him to do anything just so you can bung him an extra few million a year that is not caught by FFP).
Without the illegal support of Abu Dhabi, City would have done a "Leeds" - imploded, and spent a decade in the championship.
How much did they pay for Julian Alvarez?
It was terrible squad management. I was in here actively arguing against selling guys like Guehi and Livramento. But I was just answering a question about the incomings and outgoings the summer we signed Lukaku.Not recouped as you haven’t sold anyone this window but last season sold; Abraham, Zouma, Tomori, Guehi. Whilst academy players, they weren’t insignificant contributors and that only makes the deal look worse.
The market value of those players now v Lukaku would highlight that.
Barcelona didn't need to start buying up clubs in Mickey Mouse leagues to try & create a Global footprint. They were Barcelona, everyone knew who they were. The multi club model is a Soriano innovation. This looks like it's going the same way as his disastrous Spanair venture.Where is Barcelona's equivalent to the CFG clubs (currently nine clubs)?
is that the number of years he should go to jail for?
Them winning the CL is a matter of when. It will happen eventually.Still can't win CL. So happy that Real knocked them out and would have supported Liverpool in the final just because of this.
Agreed. And anyne here sayign they'd support Liverpool in anything and for anything should have a lifetime banThem winning the CL is a matter of when. It will happen eventually.
wouldn’t be surprised if they win it this year with the signings they are making. Ergh.Agreed. And anyne here sayign they'd support Liverpool in anything and for anything should have a lifetime ban
If Liverpool were the only club left in English football, I'd watch women's netball! (no disrespect to women or netball intended)
I look at it this one (and I'm aware I'm being overly optimistic): if/when Pep leaves, not sure City will be able to replace him and keep things as they are. More likely to drop. Sadly, Liverpool's foundations look much more sturdy to me so when Klopp leaves, they will just continue on - unless someone can convince them to hire Ole!wouldn’t be surprised if they win it this year with the signings they are making. Ergh.
hmmm that’s a tricky one as the one thing I don’t want city to win is the CL. Soon as they do, they start to become a big club and start winning it more i reckon. Liverpool winning it isn’t any better. It’s a terrible time to be a United fan really
Nah, City were winning league titles before Pep too. Will likely continue to win after he leaves, probably with less frequency but still fairly regularly. Liverpool's current success on the other hand is completely down to Klopp. They'll be back to fighting for top-4 very soon. Even now, they need to play their hearts out just to give City a challenge.I look at it this one (and I'm aware I'm being overly optimistic): if/when Pep leaves, not sure City will be able to replace him and keep things as they are. More likely to drop. Sadly, Liverpool's foundations look much more sturdy to me so when Klopp leaves, they will just continue on - unless someone can convince them to hire Ole!
Don't worry, they will hire Slippy Stevie the hero, all will be good and they will never win anything again :}I look at it this one (and I'm aware I'm being overly optimistic): if/when Pep leaves, not sure City will be able to replace him and keep things as they are. More likely to drop. Sadly, Liverpool's foundations look much more sturdy to me so when Klopp leaves, they will just continue on - unless someone can convince them to hire Ole!
Oh, I forgot about him! Pretty easy to do as I was never a fan, even when he was in an england shirtDon't worry, they will hire Slippy Stevie the hero, all will be good and they will never win anything again :}
Must be true then if he says it. It couldn't be related to losing Messi and Ronaldo and the 2 ideal replacements have both rejected the Spanish league which could have negative impacts on how they sell the Spanish league to foreign buyers as a result?The La Liga president said after the Mbappe transfer that he doesn’t believe the true cost of the Haaland transfer would ever be reported. I have felt the same way for many years - the wages and sign-ons etc are private information. Who knows how much they are paying.