'Pep' Guardiola sack watch

[Maluco]

They have not replace Aguero with a new shining toy yet. He was their top striker for several seasons

But they will, they just chose to spend £100 million on Grealish first because they’re first choice wasn’t available.

These record profits they have recorded during Covid is just them slowly but surely widening the gap.

In 7-8 years, the gap will be a chasm and then people will wonder why nothing was done about it.

 

[kaiser1]

But they will, they just chose to spend £100 million on Grealish first because they’re first choice wasn’t available.

These record profits they have recorded during Covid is just them slowly but surely widening the gap.

In 7-8 years, the gap will be a chasm and then people will wonder why nothing was done about it.

They are running away with the league without a striker, without a strong 2nd team that Chelsea and Man Utd have
City has a 2nd team that looks like Steffen, Egan Riley, Stones, Ake, Zinchenko, Fernandinho, Gundogan, McAtee, Jesus, Sterling, Palmer which is inferior to what their rivals have

 

[Maluco]

They are running away with the league without a striker, without a strong 2nd team that Chelsea and Man Utd have
City has a 2nd team that looks like Steffen, Egan Riley, Stones, Ake, Zinchenko, Fernandinho, Gundogan, McAtee, Jesus, Sterling, Palmer

It would have Grealish/Foden in there, because they already have Bernardo, Sterling, Mahrez and only space for one of them in first 11. Looks pretty great to me, with a new striker, left back and midfielder to come…

A seven man bench of Steffan, Stones, Ake, Gundogan, Fernandinho, Sterling, Jesus is fantastic before those signings even arrive.

Pep is a great coach. City’s owners have done a tremendous job in organizing their strategies and resources, but they have too many resources and that will only become more and more apparent.

 

[giorno]

wasn't it that City was about to sign same 37 year old Ronaldo which prompted us to buy him again? Are you seriuosly comparing Jesus and Sterling with Ronaldo and Cavani? They are at best comparable to Rashford and Martial.

Is this for real? I'll give you Gabriel Jesus but any comparison of Sterling with Rashford or Martial begins and ends with "is he better?" "Yes of fecking course he's better. Do you watch football?"

They are after Fred as well before United signed him. He'd be playing like Gundogan if he were in City.

They also wanted Maguire, Lukaku and Alexis, signed Graelish for waaaaay too much money and missed out on Kane as a result, signed Ake, still don't have a CF or a natural left-footed LWB(aside from you know who who's been a disaster of a signing)

City were interested in Fred is not a very good argument. And Gundogan? Fecking hell he was one of the best midfielders in the world at dortmund, key player for a side that made a CL final. What the feck has Fred done to be compared to Gundogan, seriously

 

[Daysleeper]

https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/so...inder-the-rich-always-get-their-way-1.4778060

 

[Zlaatan]

lets compare? who is individually better than Ronaldo, Rashford, Cavani, Sancho, Mason and Martial in City?
Who is better than Bruno and Pogba in City's attacking midfield? KDB and Bernardo are at par not better.
Gundogan, Fernandinho and Rodri are not really better than Fred, McT, Matic.
Who is better than Varane and Maguire in City, Dias might be better than the rest but definitely not better than Varane. Maguire is better than all other City defenders.
Degea is overall arguably better than their sweeper keeper.

Like I said, they are just superbly well drilled, cohesive unit. And it is all down to world class coaching.

Obviously our players would look better individually in a well drilled team and some City players can lean on their team mates and Pep's system in a way our players can't, but with the exception of the attacking midfield and DDG this reads as if you've never seen any of these players outside of FIFA 18. The bolded parts especially needs about 34 pairs of red tinted glasses to even start making sense.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

When Pep joined, he met City as the 4th placed team with 66points level with LVG Man Utd.

From then till now Man Utd has spent slightly more on than City that finished with 66points

Currently Man city does not have as much player depth as Man Utd or Chelsea. Their forward players are Grealish Foden Mahrez, Sterling and Jesus. Which of these would be the best attacker in your team?

Why are we comparing them with Liverpool? why not with Chelsea or Man Utd who have spent a billion dollars as well in the las 6 seasons?

While it's true that City and United were around a similar points total when Pep joined it wasn't an appropriate reflection of the quality and culture of the two teams. That was our level whereas it was City underperforming for one reason or another. They were champions a little while go and were expected to become so in due course. They had a good style of play that didn't need to be taken apart.

Also we can compare City with United but you'd be comparing an excellently run club with a great manager to... a not well run United under meltdown Jose and then an average Ole. It's not like this rival team spending lots is competent so it's a useless comparison.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

They are running away with the league without a striker, without a strong 2nd team that Chelsea and Man Utd have
City has a 2nd team that looks like Steffen, Egan Riley, Stones, Ake, Zinchenko, Fernandinho, Gundogan, McAtee, Jesus, Sterling, Palmer which is inferior to what their rivals have

These are title winning players. We don't have second string players as good. Wasn't Stones just brilliant last season? Our first choice CBs have never played that well. Those CMs are much better than our first choice ones. While I'd take Sancho on potential Sterling is better than any wide player we have.

 

[Paddy B]

I am serious when I say any of City's current players would look just as average in United side and put any of United players in City, and they would suddenly start looking like world beaters.

I understand what you are saying but I have to disagree with you. I honestly think that some of the City players are just better and more skilled footballers. I am referring to the likes of Bernardo, Cancelo, KDB, Rodri, Dias and Foden. But hey it's all about opinions and I still think United have a good chance at top four. Tottenham, Arsenal and West Ham are so inconsistent.

 

[Ladron de redcafe]

Your argument doesn’t add up. Mourinho was at Chelsea for 3 seasons in the mid 00s winning the league twice and a FA cup (and a couple of league cups). Who knows what would have happened if he stayed on in his fourth season? The fact that the interim manager (Avram) still managed to get his same team to push us all the way on 3 fronts that season proves my point.

Pep’s on course to win his 4th title in 6 seasons…basically at the same ratio Mourinho did in the 00s. Again, it’s like having unlimited resources and funds makes your job easier…because it does.

Mourinho started 4 seasons there. The fact that he didn't finish his 4th was due to the fact that he was losing to a team that wasn't spending anywhere near as much as he was

Mourinho never managed to do the league and cup double, nevermind doing the domestic treble, as Pep did.

He never managed to win a league by 19 points, get 100 points, get 32 wins in a season, or even come close to touching Guardiola's records. Despite spending more than Guardiola did, relative to United.

The last point is just bizzare. Mourinho startef 4 seasons in his first stint and only won titles. He didn't get to continue because he was relieved of his duties. Why on earth would you extrapolate and give him more titles than he won?

Your initial point was that Guardiola has an unlimited budget and that it isn't difficult to do what he does due to that unlimited budget. Mourinho spent more relative to the next higher spender and didn't dominate anywhere near as much as Guardiola did.

 

[Noot]

These are title winning players. We don't have second string players as good. Wasn't Stones just brilliant last season? Our first choice CBs have never played that well. Those CMs are much better than our first choice ones. While I'd take Sancho on potential Sterling is better than any wide player we have.

This is the frustration City fans have in these debates, though. Before the season starts, when everyone's comparing squads, most people would say City have a pretty good squad that isn't the best in the league in most positions.

Then when January comes and City pull ahead the narrative switches to "anyone would win the league easily with that squad". Hang on, a few months ago we only had one or two players who would get into the league's best XI?

On paper, if everyone was performing at their best, I genuinely believe most fans would only allow Dias, Cancelo and De Bruyne into a combined Premier League XI. It's only when we start winning that everyone pretends our squad is so much better than theirs.

 

[TenonTen]

This is the frustration City fans have in these debates, though. Before the season starts, when everyone's comparing squads, most people would say City have a pretty good squad that isn't the best in the league in most positions.

Then when January comes and City pull ahead the narrative switches to "anyone would win the league easily with that squad". Hang on, a few months ago we only had one or two players who would get into the league's best XI?

On paper, if everyone was performing at their best, I genuinely believe most fans would only allow Dias, Cancelo and De Bruyne into a combined Premier League XI. It's only when we start winning that everyone pretends our squad is so much better than theirs.

I think City and Pep have gone out got very good functional players. Most of these are like 50-70 million level players whose role City and Pep perfectly know. These are extremely meticulously planned transfers.

The thing is, in order to prevent further criticism and repeated backlash from the media City have gone out and got players who are not big names but very functionally appropriate. If City bought big name players continuously they'd get even more flak for buying out the league. Most of the City players aren't that marketable to attract further scrutiny.

This model is extremely smart and works brilliantly because City have a legendary coach and in the club Pep is the biggest entity and his reputation means that the players won't try to act like the boss infront of him. This prevents the infamous "ego clashes" big clubs are known for. Pep is the star here!

This is why City won't get Mbappe and Haaland(?) probably; I think it will be more in character for City and Pep to go for a Vlahovic than a Haaland.

 

[Smacky The Frog]

This is the frustration City fans have in these debates, though. Before the season starts, when everyone's comparing squads, most people would say City have a pretty good squad that isn't the best in the league in most positions.

Then when January comes and City pull ahead the narrative switches to "anyone would win the league easily with that squad". Hang on, a few months ago we only had one or two players who would get into the league's best XI?

On paper, if everyone was performing at their best, I genuinely believe most fans would only allow Dias, Cancelo and De Bruyne into a combined Premier League XI. It's only when we start winning that everyone pretends our squad is so much better than theirs.

Good post, but I doubt you're gonna get much sympathy here. Even last season, it was the same thing. Hiccups early on - Man City need a striker / they aren't that good are they / Pep Guardiola is my idol finally knows what it's like to struggle. Dominate from midway through the season with fecking Gundagon as your main goalscorer - this is so unfair!!!!!! All their players are better than our players!

A great coach with a functional system will always make the individual parts look better, and vice versa, as is so clearly evident with United. The likes of Stones, Zinchenko, even Sterling, would get pelters if they played for United.

I guess you just have to take solace in your four titles in six years or whatever it is now. I think you'll make it.

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

The thing is, in order to prevent further criticism and repeated backlash from the media City have gone out and got players who are not big names but very functionally appropriate. If City bought big name players continuously they'd get even more flak for buying out the league. Most of the City players aren't that marketable to attract further scrutiny.

This is a wild post.

City care so much about marketing that they deliberately buy non-marketable players so that people don't yell at them.

Feels like the fact they failed to initially suspend an accused serial rapist would suggest they don't actually think too hard about non-football aspects but hey I could be wrong.

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

The last point is just bizzare. Mourinho startef 4 seasons in his first stint and only won titles. He didn't get to continue because he was relieved of his duties. Why on earth would you extrapolate and give him more titles than he won?

Yeah comparing "title ratios" is completely unsound. We only need to look at Mourinho's record over the last 6 years to know that "ratios" don't just perpetuate into infinity.

 

[Marwood]

This is the frustration City fans have in these debates, though. Before the season starts, when everyone's comparing squads, most people would say City have a pretty good squad that isn't the best in the league in most positions.

Then when January comes and City pull ahead the narrative switches to "anyone would win the league easily with that squad". Hang on, a few months ago we only had one or two players who would get into the league's best XI?

On paper, if everyone was performing at their best, I genuinely believe most fans would only allow Dias, Cancelo and De Bruyne into a combined Premier League XI. It's only when we start winning that everyone pretends our squad is so much better than theirs.

There are few squads in the history of the Prem that have the best players in most positions.

Although along with Dias, Cancelo and De Bruyne I'd add Silva. So that's four, quite a lot. Then you have a bunch of players very close to being the best in their respective position. Mahrez, Sterling , Laporte, Stones etc. You do have the best squad.

But agree Pep gets the most out of them. He sticks to his way, doesn't buy players who don't fit. Same as Klopp, Dyche and Potter.

Drives me mad when managers are all over the place in terms of the type of player they bring in.

 

[Thunderhead]

There are few squads in the history of the Prem that have the best players in most positions.

Although along with Dias, Cancelo and De Bruyne I'd add Silva. So that's four, quite a lot. Then you have a bunch of players very close to being the best in their respective position. Mahrez, Sterling , Laporte, Stones etc. You do have the best squad.

But agree Pep gets the most out of them. He sticks to his way, doesn't buy players who don't fit. Same as Klopp, Dyche and Potter.

Drives me mad when managers are all over the place in terms of the type of player they bring in.

That's why Newcastle need a proper DoF, if they don't they'll flip flop from managers with different footballing styles who will have no use for certain players they've probably purchased for big bucks, still think most clubs should have a football management team now so when purchasing players you're in discussion with the coach to get the correct fits, mind this falls down if you get a shit DoF so it's not set in stone that it's going to work out 100% of the time.

 

[giorno]

This is the frustration City fans have in these debates, though. Before the season starts, when everyone's comparing squads, most people would say City have a pretty good squad that isn't the best in the league in most positions.

I'm sorry, what? Who exactly thought city didn't have the best squad before the season started?

Seriously. Ederson, walker, dias, laporte, stones, cancelo, zinchenko, mendy(this was pre-accusations came up), rodri, fernandinho, gundogan, de bruyne, bernardo, foden, graelish, mahrez, sterling, gabriel, ferran. That's 15 starting caliber players and 3 backups

???

Chelsea's mendy, christensen, azpi, thiago, rudi, chalobah, chilwell, james, alonso, jorginho, kante, kovacic, mount, havertz, lukaku, werner, cho, pulisic, ziyech??? 13 starting caliber players and 6 backups. And 3 of those starting caliber players would be backups for City

Liverpool's alisson, taa, vvd, matip, gomez, konate, robertson, tsimikas, fabinho, thiago, hendo, elliott, jones, keita, ox, milner, salah, firmino, jota, mane, origi??? 13 starters and the rest are backup quality

Look at the quality of the starting XI and backups ffs. Chelsea have clearly worse forwards and liverpool clearly worse quality in depth

Yes the difference isn't huge - that's where Guardiola comes in. And also luck to be fair - but City clearly have the best squad in the league

 

[Ludens the Red]

This is the frustration City fans have in these debates, though. Before the season starts, when everyone's comparing squads, most people would say City have a pretty good squad that isn't the best in the league in most positions.

Then when January comes and City pull ahead the narrative switches to "anyone would win the league easily with that squad". Hang on, a few months ago we only had one or two players who would get into the league's best XI?

On paper, if everyone was performing at their best, I genuinely believe most fans would only allow Dias, Cancelo and De Bruyne into a combined Premier League XI. It's only when we start winning that everyone pretends our squad is so much better than theirs.

I don’t think so…. Other than obvious players like Kante, van dijk, salah and Kane most of the rest youd say city players would get in. Most of the time when people do these joint line up things city end up with 7-8 in the team.


Ederson, Laporte, Sterling, and Foden (especially foden nowadays) get put in best 11’s. On top of the players you mentioned.
Outside of Chelsea and Liverpool I can’t even fathom which players from other clubs would be described as better than their city counterparts other than Kane.
Provide a list of players people pick ahead of city players not playing for those two…..

 

[Thunderhead]

I don’t think so…. Other than obvious players like Kante, van dijk, salah and Kane most of the rest youd say city players would get in. Most of the time when people do these joint line up things city end up with 7-8 in the team.


Ederson, Laporte, Sterling, and Foden (especially foden nowadays) get put in best 11’s.
Outside of Chelsea and Liverpool I can’t even fathom which players from other clubs would be described as better than their city counterparts other than Kane.
Provide a list of players people pick ahead of city players not playing for those two…..

Not going with Chelsea or Liverpool I think the following would possibly get in, lots of it is personal preference though.

DDG and Ramsdale are better keepers in the traditional sense than Ederson but Ederson's distribution is on another level so he doesn't need to be a 'great' keeper in the traditional sense.
Verane is still a better defender than Laporte or Stones,
right back is personal preference between the top 3 but yeah I'd say no other team has a right back that would displace Waker
Cancelo isn't really a left back but no one is displacing him, you could make a case for Cresswell or Tierny maybe
Midfield, Rice and Phillips are different to Rodri so probably personal preference, I'd love Rice at City though and woudn't argue the toss if people say Rodri is better / worse than him
Midfield, I still love Pogba and think he could walk into any teams midfield, if he was managed right I honestly think he'd not be far off Balon d'or
Midfield, Bruno
Midfield - Smith-Rowe possibly
Wingers / Attackers - Son, Saka, Antonio, Bowen - not saying I'd swap any City players for any of these but they're the sort of players people would pick over Sterling, Mahrez, Foden etc.

 

[kaiser1]

These are title winning players. We don't have second string players as good. Wasn't Stones just brilliant last season? Our first choice CBs have never played that well. Those CMs are much better than our first choice ones. While I'd take Sancho on potential Sterling is better than any wide player we have.

Stones Sterling Zinchenko are title winners because they are under Guardiola
Bailly Lindelof Martial Telles can replace those names and win titles.
Gundogan Fernandinho are no different from DvB and Matic who have won the league at their previous clubs

Swap all these players to Man city and we will be hearing of how great DvB was at Ajax(Gundogan) , Matic was at Chelsea a tested PL DM(Fernandinho) , the obvious world class talent of Martial(Sterling), Zinchenko an AM who is now a LB etc

 

[ExecutionerWasp001]

United signing Ronaldo was a mistake, he is 37, and requires service to score... building your team around a 37 years old, who does nothing outside of the small area, will never be good, it doesn't matter if he is a GOAT or not, time passes for everyone.
City tricked United into signing old Ronaldo IMO.

Ronaldo used City as leverage to get his move to Utd.

He, like many of us, presumed he was going to be the icing on the cake. We were coming off a 2nd place last season. We had deficiencies in MF but i'm sure he thought with the signings of Verane & Sancho we'd have enough to cover these deficiencies. Nobody could have foresaw that various players form would fall off a cliff this season.

I'm sure if he knew then what he knows now he would have gone to City.

 

[CoopersDream]

I don’t think so…. Other than obvious players like Kante, van dijk, salah and Kane most of the rest youd say city players would get in. Most of the time when people do these joint line up things city end up with 7-8 in the team.


Ederson, Laporte, Sterling, and Foden (especially foden nowadays) get put in best 11’s. On top of the players you mentioned.
Outside of Chelsea and Liverpool I can’t even fathom which players from other clubs would be described as better than their city counterparts other than Kane.
Provide a list of players people pick ahead of city players not playing for those two…..

I would say something like this is the best 11 in Premier League

Alisson
Alexander-Arnold Dias Van Dijk Cancelo
De Bruyne Kante Jorginho
Salah Ronaldo Mane

You could argue that Ederson is better than Alisson, but they're about the same. I know Cancelo is more of a right back than left, but anyway. Walker could be argued for Trent, but I think Trent is better with the ball so I'd go with him. CBs are a toss up, it could be any variant of Van Dijk/Silva/Dias/Varane really. Midfield I guess you could chose Gundogan over Jorginho, but it's not clear cut at all. In the right team, under the right managment Pogba could be the best in the league in that position anyway. Front line I guess one could argue that Foden could be in for Mane, but then Son could be in for either. I still think Mane is the best in that position in the league.

I also don't think the bench would be overly City heavy either, would probably be something like

Ederson, Walker, Silva, Robertson, Gundogan, Rice, Kane, Bruno, Foden

 

[Thunderhead]

I would say something like this is the best 11 in Premier League

Alisson
Alexander-Arnold Dias Van Dijk Cancelo
De Bruyne Kante Jorginho
Salah Ronaldo Mane

You could argue that Ederson is better than Alisson, but they're about the same. I know Cancelo is more of a right back than left, but anyway. Walker could be argued for Trent, but I think Trent is better with the ball so I'd go with him. CBs are a toss up, it could be any variant of Van Dijk/Silva/Dias/Varane really. Midfield I guess you could chose Gundogan over Jorginho, but it's not clear cut at all. In the right team, under the right managment Pogba could be the best in the league in that position anyway. Front line I guess one could argue that Foden could be in for Mane, but then Son could be in for either. I still think Mane is the best in that position in the league.

I also don't think the bench would be overly City heavy either, would probably be something like

Ederson, Walker, Silva, Robertson, Gundogan, Rice, Kane, Bruno, Foden

think the question was to put players into the City team who didn't play for Chelsea or Liverpool

 

[JDoe]

This is the frustration City fans have in these debates, though. Before the season starts, when everyone's comparing squads, most people would say City have a pretty good squad that isn't the best in the league in most positions.

Then when January comes and City pull ahead the narrative switches to "anyone would win the league easily with that squad". Hang on, a few months ago we only had one or two players who would get into the league's best XI?

On paper, if everyone was performing at their best, I genuinely believe most fans would only allow Dias, Cancelo and De Bruyne into a combined Premier League XI. It's only when we start winning that everyone pretends our squad is so much better than theirs.

Honestly man, you've got to be trolling right? How can one be this deluded?

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

Transfermarkt allows you look at the 'market value at debut' for a player. It also allows you look at current value, and transfer fees.

The amount paid for the current squads is:

City - 986m
Chelsea - 727m
United - 890m
Liverpool - 586m

City have obviously spent a lot more than the rest, though United have spent the 2nd most and have not been the 2nd best team overall.

What is the difference between the market value when a player debuted and the fee paid for the player? For this I remove the youth products and only keep transfers from other clubs (even if the fee was zero):

City - 336m
Chelsea - 132m
United - 140m
Liverpool - 73m

Market value of each player of the squad at their debut is:

City - 650m (average 36m, std 17m)
Chelsea - 594m (average 37m, std 27m)
United - 750m (average 37.5m, std 23m)
Liverpool - 513m (average 25.6m, std 19m)

If you look at the distribution of transfer fees, City's seems different than the rest:

They seem to have a clear strategy. They pay an average amount of 50m for a player, and focus primarily on purchasing players that aren't too far away from that average. They use their financial resources to overpay for those players. Meanwhile, United and Chelsea purchase in a wider spread. They have more cheaper players, more homegrown players, but also reach into the far end of the market and pay top money for players.

So I would say that if City have a better, more balanced squad overall, it is not simply because they have more money to spend. They have a conscious strategy of keeping to a certain quality and a certain type of transfer, and don't deviate too much from it. Their money certainly makes this strategy easier, but it is by no means impossible without it. There are undervalued players in the market, mostly due to their contractual situation. Plenty of great transfers have happened this way. City just don't tap this market a whole lot.

 

[Bearded One]

Is this for real? I'll give you Gabriel Jesus but any comparison of Sterling with Rashford or Martial begins and ends with "is he better?" "Yes of fecking course he's better. Do you watch football?"

They also wanted Maguire, Lukaku and Alexis, signed Graelish for waaaaay too much money and missed out on Kane as a result, signed Ake, still don't have a CF or a natural left-footed LWB(aside from you know who who's been a disaster of a signing)

City were interested in Fred is not a very good argument. And Gundogan? Fecking hell he was one of the best midfielders in the world at dortmund, key player for a side that made a CL final. What the feck has Fred done to be compared to Gundogan, seriously

Sterling is better because Martial’s career has been moving downwards since but in his first season in England, he clearly had the tools to becoming one of the best young players in Europe. All you need to do is take a step back and see an old thread about him.

They could have signed Kane on top of Grealish but guess what, they didn’t. They wanted to but they couldn’t. We cannot judge the strength of a team based on what they can potentially do. City is running away with the league not because they could have had Kane but because they are doing most football things well. If United had a window of signing Grealish and Man City signed Verane, Ronaldo, Sancho in the same window who would you reckon to have done better? We were the smarter in this transfer window but unfortunately we don’t know how to make use of what we’ve got. They just know how to get the best from players including the much riled Mendy who tore the premier league a new one in his first season before his recurring injuries probably caused by his lousy lifestyle.

Fred may not have done anything of note but he was a budding player just like Jorginho and Rodri, players city showed interest in. And guess what you couldn’t use Gundogan’s past glory to win current games. It’s just like saying using FernandoTorres’ past glory as a measure of expectation from him in his latter years. Gundogan was well past it in his first few seasons at City if we are tellingourselves the truth.

 

[Liver_bird]

They’re a near perfect premier league side. Hopefully they keep missing out on the CL though.

 

[dal]

City are killing it. Unbelievable.

Ronaldo must be turning in his cot.

 

[ThierryFabregas]

Sterling is better because Martial’s career has been moving downwards since but in his first season in England, he clearly had the tools to becoming one of the best young players in Europe. All you need to do is take a step back and see an old thread about him.

They could have signed Kane on top of Grealish but guess what, they didn’t. They wanted to but they couldn’t. We cannot judge the strength of a team based on what they can potentially do. City is running away with the league not because they could have had Kane but because they are doing most football things well. If United had a window of signing Grealish and Man City signed Verane, Ronaldo, Sancho in the same window who would you reckon to have done better? We were the smarter in this transfer window but unfortunately we don’t know how to make use of what we’ve got. They just know how to get the best from players including the much riled Mendy who tore the premier league a new one in his first season before his recurring injuries probably caused by his lousy lifestyle.

Fred may not have done anything of note but he was a budding player just like Jorginho and Rodri, players city showed interest in. And guess what you couldn’t use Gundogan’s past glory to win current games. It’s just like saying using FernandoTorres’ past glory as a measure of expectation from him in his latter years. Gundogan was well past it in his first few seasons at City if we are tellingourselves the truth.

You were smarter this window, seriously?

Our weakest position is our midfield 6 and 8, what should we do? Put half our wagebill into an old striker when we already have very good strikers

Our weakest position is our midfield 6 and 8, what should we do? Nigh on match our transfer record for a winger paying him insane wages in order to freeze out our already top class wingers and create dressingroom discount

Window before that

Paul Pogba is an A Grade midfielder who needs 2 midfield partners alongside him with high defensive contribution that allows him to drift forward and focus on creating, what should we do? Buy a number 10 who really can't play in the same system as Pogba. BIG BRAIN THINKING

I don't really think City were smart with the Grealish signing because they didn't need him and they probably have a better summer with your signings but they do benefit from having great attacking midfielders as it's part of their Guardiola DNA.

 

[padr81]

Other teams will sell, City won’t. His squads before this season were arguably even stronger, so I am not going to give him credit for going without a 50 million left back when he has another one! It’s not like he was sold to buy Grealish. He is still in the squad!

Going strikerless shows how well he organizes teams, but it’s a five month stretch in a season where the league is already gone!

Everyone else will sell players to buy and balance their books. City won’t because of their profits. How is that not an advantage?

Haven't they sold 120m worth of players this season alone? Running a lower net spend than United last 5 years according to transfermarkt?

 

[Maluco]

Haven't they sold 120m worth of players this season alone? Running a lower net spend than United last 5 years according to transfermarkt?

United are complete buffoons and should be restricted for their own good anyway

I think proper salary caps and serious financial regulations would do everyone the world of good. Chris Wood just went for £25 million. I think it’s time.

 

[adexkola]

I'm sorry, what? Who exactly thought city didn't have the best squad before the season started?

Placeholder while I pull up some posts, but yeah this was not a consensus before the season started. I do agree there's an element of hindsight here.

 

[NoPace]

They seem to have a clear strategy. They pay an average amount of 50m for a player, and focus primarily on purchasing players that aren't too far away from that average. They use their financial resources to overpay for those players. Meanwhile, United and Chelsea purchase in a wider spread. They have more cheaper players, more homegrown players, but also reach into the far end of the market and pay top money for players.

So I would say that if City have a better, more balanced squad overall, it is not simply because they have more money to spend. They have a conscious strategy of keeping to a certain quality and a certain type of transfer, and don't deviate too much from it. Their money certainly makes this strategy easier, but it is by no means impossible without it. There are undervalued players in the market, mostly due to their contractual situation. Plenty of great transfers have happened this way. City just don't tap this market a whole lot.

Yeah, they take the risk out of it by buying guys in the right age bracket for big but not insane amounts. It's why the Kane pursuit was weird and I wouldn't have minded it happening, even if he would have made them scarier this year and next. I just think his legs will be gone by 30 and he'll still be good but 100M for him instead of 70M for Haaland makes sense.

 

[DoneDaDa]

They seem to have a clear strategy. They pay an average amount of 50m for a player, and focus primarily on purchasing players that aren't too far away from that average. They use their financial resources to overpay for those players. Meanwhile, United and Chelsea purchase in a wider spread. They have more cheaper players, more homegrown players, but also reach into the far end of the market and pay top money for players.

So I would say that if City have a better, more balanced squad overall, it is not simply because they have more money to spend. They have a conscious strategy of keeping to a certain quality and a certain type of transfer, and don't deviate too much from it. Their money certainly makes this strategy easier, but it is by no means impossible without it. There are undervalued players in the market, mostly due to their contractual situation. Plenty of great transfers have happened this way. City just don't tap this market a whole lot.

I agree with most of what your saying, but they do break transfer records which means they do pay top money for players. KdB was the most expensive midfielder till Pogba and Cout, Stones was the most expensive CB till Van Dijk and Maguire, Ederson was the most expensive GK till Allison and Kepa, Walker/Mendy were the most expensive full backs till Cancelo (who also signed for City) and now I think Hakim owns that title, and Rodri is the most expensive DM, Grealish the most expensive English player, the 50m average is there because that was the top price when they purchased them, when they had to purchase Fernadinho replacement they broke the DM record, to replace KdB/B.Silva they bought Grealish and broke the English record and there own. The same will happen for striker/finisher they'll probably spend about 80-100m+ to bring one in. The difference is they've been successful with there signing hence they didn't have to go into the market again or could refuse to pay because they already have a dominate/championship winning team.

The difference is they have arguable a generational manager in Pep to put all this together, while United have had bang average coaches and Chelsea despite having managers like Conte and Tuchel, they're very trigger happy when the going gets tough, which will prevent them from having there own domination. If Chelsea stick with Tuchel and give him the time once Pep leaves it'll be Chelsea league to rule.

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

I agree with most of what your saying, but they do break transfer records which means they do pay top money for players. KdB was the most expensive midfielder till Pogba and Cout, Stones was the most expensive CB till Van Dijk and Maguire, Ederson was the most expensive GK till Allison and Kepa, Walker/Mendy were the most expensive full backs till Cancelo (who also signed for City) and now I think Hakim owns that title, and Rodri is the most expensive DM, Grealish the most expensive English player, the 50m average is there because that was the top price when they purchased them, when they had to purchase Fernadinho replacement they broke the DM record, to replace KdB/B.Silva they bought Grealish and broke the English record and there own.

Some of these records aren't very meaningful. Ferdinand cost about the same as Stones accounting for currency inflation, and Buffon considerably more than Ederson. David Luiz cost more than Stones, for that matter, so that record isn't real. Some of the records have been completely demolished in just a year or two.

But I'm not sure what we're disagreeing on. In my post, I said the numbers show City is overpaying for players. It looks like they overpay on basically every transfer by like 10-15m.

 

[DoneDaDa]

Some of these records aren't very meaningful. Ferdinand cost about the same as Stones accounting for currency inflation, and Buffon considerably more than Ederson. David Luiz cost more than Stones, for that matter, so that record isn't real. Some of the records have been completely demolished in just a year or two.

But I'm not sure what we're disagreeing on. In my post, I said the numbers show City is overpaying for players. It looks like they overpay on basically every transfer by like 10-15m.

Ahh I reread the post. I thought you said City don’t dip into higher market for players, but it just looks like I misread what you said.

 

[padr81]

United are complete buffoons and should be restricted for their own good anyway

I think proper salary caps and serious financial regulations would do everyone the world of good. Chris Wood just went for £25 million. I think it’s time.

That we agree on buddy.

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

DDG and Ramsdale are better keepers in the traditional sense than Ederson but Ederson's distribution is on another level so he doesn't need to be a 'great' keeper in the traditional sense.

This is properly mental. Ederson is in with a shout for best keeper the league has ever seen. His save percentage is north of 75%. His pass completion is pushing 90%. He clicks up assists and key passes every season. He’s kept a clean sheet in 50% of his PL appearances. He’s better at everything than everyone.

He’s completely redefined goalkeeping (along with several others).

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

The difference is they have arguable a generational manager in Pep to put all this together, while United have had bang average coaches and Chelsea despite having managers like Conte and Tuchel, they're very trigger happy when the going gets tough, which will prevent them from having there own domination. If Chelsea stick with Tuchel and give him the time once Pep leaves it'll be Chelsea league to rule.

England most successful club across the last 20 years. As many Champions Leagues as we’ve won in the last 40 years.

They have a different model but they win dickloads of trophies.