'Pep' Guardiola sack watch
- Thread starter Classical Mechanic
- Start date
Also helps if there is the option to sign 100m Grealish and keep him on the bench for a season while he gets used to the team. Same for Bernardo Silva and John Stones when they started. Or Ake more recently. On the other hand, Ole had to play Maguire regardless of performance simply because he cost a bunch and we didn't have another 60-80m defender just chilling on the bench.
We regularly have £80m Maguire and £75m Sancho on the bench though. Granted, they were bought by a different manager, but that is gonna happen when we change manager every 2-3 years.
Easier to do that when the players you’ve previously signed are settled. City have had the likes of Mahrez, Silva, Gundo, KDB settled for a long time. We could have had Mhiki, Sanchez, Lukaku, DVB all in those front positions in that time frame. But they’ve failed.
That leaves Phillips (so far) and Mendy (was terrible before any of the off-field issues arose) as considerable flops in 7 years. If you want to include cheap punts, Bravo, Nolito and potentially Sergio Gomez might be heading that way.
Assuming our transfers were all hits and we went with the most expensive players bought in that era in the first team, we would now have a first team of De Gea, Wan Bissaka, Maguire, Martinez, Shaw, Casemiro, Pogba, Sancho, Bruno, Antony and Martial with a bench of Dalot, Varane, Lindelof, Bailly, Fred, van de Beek, Matic and Sanchez. That does not include homegrown talent like Rashford, Garnacho, McTominay or cheap signings like Eriksen and Malacia.
I can't be bothered to do an actual math but I believe the above squad is far more expensive than the one City have assembled in the same time. Probably not even close.
Sad but true. That’s why I never understand our fans being so vocal on criticizing City spending/signings. We have almost spent as much on new signings but have done far worst.
But they're clearly paying much more than what's reported, or something.
Another interesting perspective is to see from where each club make their signings. In that pas ten years:
City:
Haaland from Dortmund
Gundogan from Dortmund
Akanji from Dortmund
Cancelo from Juventus
Rodri from Atletico Madrid
Walker from Tottenham
Sterling from Liverpool
Danilo from Real Madrid
Bravo from Barcelona
In the same period for us:
Di Maria from Real Madrid
Casemiro from Real Madrid
Varane from Real Madrid
Mkhitaryan from Dortmund
Sancho from Dortmund
Pogba from Juventus
Ronaldo from Juventus
Matic from Chelsea
Mata from Chelsea
Sanchez from Arsenal
Schweinsteiger from Bayern
Zlatan from PSG
Cavani from PSG
I might have missed some smaller transfers for City, but suffice to say we also generall spend much worse than City we also buy our players from bigger clubs than City.
We had bad owners who don’t know how to sell anything. First they give average players big money and then they can‘t sell them for years. City’s net spending looks better because they sell players at a good time.
Then we have had average managers and no manager or recruitment/squad planning, so huge sums were wasted for managers as everyone of them had their own preferred player profiles.
If you had given similar money to what we have wasted since Fergie retired to ETH (and a good club structure to support him) or if Klopp had spent similar money at Liverpool then they would have most likely won some of the trophies Pep has won.
No other manager for example would be allowed to drop the only quality academy player who has come out of their 1 billion investment in infrastructure and youth teams and randomly upgrade him with 100 mil Grealish.
I don’t really think they are paying more than reported. Some of those players had release clauses, as you’ve pointed out many were bought from smaller clubs who did not necessarily have leverage to push for higher fees. Those are mostly fair prices too, we can’t compare it to what United have paid for players because we are consistently fleeced by other clubs.
Yeah, I don't think so either, most fees looks very reasonable to me. They're just good at finding the right player, something we need to get better at.
Yes, now. After their confidence is shot and because they play poorly. They didn't get a season and two preseasons to gel with the team before being asked to perform week in week out. There's a big difference.
Let’s also compare the two owners and ceos? That record would not look so good with Glazers and Disneyland Ed in charge.
I'm not sure what you are trying to argue here. Grealish would probably have loved to play every game last year, but didn't because he wasn't playing well enough. If he did get to play more he'd probably have found his grove faster as well.
From recent memory both Fred and Van De Beek were brought in and mostly sat on the bench the first season here. It hasn't exactly helped them developing into the world class players we hoped that they would become. You'd rather argue that the fact the sat on the bench so much probably shot their confidence.
Also, Maguire played pretty well his first two seasons here, it's only the past two seasons he's been terrible. So you can't use that excuse for him.
How is it possible that they are paying more in transfer fees? The selling club has to declare the fee as an income in their books, Unless you are claiming that Dortmund, Juventus, Atletico, Liverpool Madrid Barcelona are all in on the City scam
It’s not- but he needs his excuse for Utd being so much worse whilst spending similar money.
City buys most of their players under 25yrs many under 23yrs so they are able to squeeze years out of them and still sell them before their 30th birthday. City got about 200M Euros from selling Jesus, Sterling Sane and Ferran
The price you sell players is a reflection of their ability on the field, Players play better under Pep and other clubs make bids based on what they see. Who among Man Utd recent buys do you think you can sell for similar price to what you paid for them? Maybe Bruno
While in City almost everyone bar Grealish and Laporte will get more than was paid for them
That’s exactly my point. We sold Dan James (a below average player) for profit because he was young, a cheap buy on low wages. But no one is going to buy Martial or Sancho mainly due to their ridiculous wages. However the owners are responsible for those contracts and wages. Buying older players and then keep extending their expensive contracts is also something we love to do. Again all down to owners and the people and structure they put in place.
Not sure what you are actually trying to say. If the trend has been for a decade to buy expensive players on huge wages and then failing to sell them, while most of them failed across 4-5 managers, then that’s exactly down to the owners and the reason of our poor selling record.
My point is that I disagree that its because your management don't know how to sell, You are not getting good prices for your sales because they play badly in your system(Which is the insight buyers have into their abilities). City bought Bernardo Rodri Ake and Dias for a lot of money but they will sell them for higher on the market right now, While almost all your signings even those that you bought young you have to sell at a loss if you sell today because they are not playing well
Sancho DvB, AWB, Martial Antony were all signed at a young age but likely wont sell them for a profit now
Pointless post how? He's the one who made that logic. I've been adamant we should never compare people in parallel terms when they are not even competing against each other. All coaches should be judged with what they achieve at that particular time. Ferguson was/is the great of 1990s, 2000s, early 2010s. Now there are new coaches who will win things in their own ways.
We have Zidane, he has won 3 champions league on the bounce, Ferguson, Pep, Mourinho have never achieved that. So comparing them is not appropriate.
Again, I'm an opposition fan. Again this is a Pep thread, or should we ask for your permission before we contribute anything here regarding Pep because you will label anyone opposition fan if they write something you don't believe in?Agai
This is the main problem with our fanbase, instead of demanding and being ruthless to all these characters especially managers/players who have taken us back, we still find ways of blaming others and finding excuses to our problems. Yet we know what trouble us
And people say we shouldn't sign players from Dortmund/Bundesliga based on our experience.
I'd say the problem was never the Bundesliga or Dortmund. It's us.
You need taking to task over how a blatant ABU clown like yourself ever became more than a newbie. This is a Utd forum not an Ipswich one so why not go and find that
And whose fault is it that the players we buy play badly in our system? I mean I can also say the owners can’t sell because they don’t buy well in the first place. Same outcome at the end.
Whose fault they dont play well? I will say the coaches. All these players were playing well and had potentials that was why you paid a huge amount for them. Its not like you knowingly paid 60M for a dud.
These players in another team will probably play better, at least they did before you signed them. Pep will likely make some of these flops in Man Utd play better under his system
See Sterling a regular double digit scorer, sometime almost hitting 20 league goals, Check how he looks this season
Ok. Cool. Pep is a genius buyer and seller. Sheikh Mansoor should thank him for buying and selling so well. While our owners are unfairly being blamed for hiring Moyes, then the opposite of him LvG, then again the opposite of him Jose … and letting each manager make their own transfers who then become the problem of the following manager with a completely different play style.
Yeah it's a bit of a silly claim. And yes, the fact that United have spent as much as we have with very little success in the post-Ferguson era isn't great. And it does bring into focus that money alone can't make you a dominant team.
In City's case, they have both money and Pep. As a combination, that automatically equals historic dominance.
What?
Just to be clear, I don't think so. It's just that general opinion of the board seems to be so. I think the transfer fees are reasonable, they probably even overpay at times due to them being able to. The comparision after is there to show that we have bought more established players from bigger clubs than City, which would make it logical that we also payed more than them.
I always thought that this "City pay more than officially declared" refers to player wages and signing fees, not transfer fees to other clubs?
And I think that's still quite possible by using sponsoring/advertising deals with state owned companies.
And I think that's still quite possible by using sponsoring/advertising deals with state owned companies.
De Bruyne - Wolfsburg
Alvarez - River Platte
Bernardo - Monaco
Stones - Everton
Dias - Benfica
Laporte - Bilbao
Ake - Bourenmouth
Ederson - Benfica
Mahrez - Leicester
Just came across this figure today, quite a shock:
Net Spend since Pep joined City:
1. Man Utd - 902m
2. Chelsea - 830m
3. City - 667m
4. Arsenal - 638m
5. West Ham - 431m
6. Spur - 427m
7. Newcastle - 380m
8. Wolves - 373m
9. Villa - 332m
10. Liverpool - 268m
Regardless whether there have been some other deals going under table for City, we have been so fecking shite in doing players transfer business.
Net Spend since Pep joined City:
1. Man Utd - 902m
2. Chelsea - 830m
3. City - 667m
4. Arsenal - 638m
5. West Ham - 431m
6. Spur - 427m
7. Newcastle - 380m
8. Wolves - 373m
9. Villa - 332m
10. Liverpool - 268m
Regardless whether there have been some other deals going under table for City, we have been so fecking shite in doing players transfer business.
We have been owned by the Glazers and run by Eddy boy. It’s not surprising to say the least. When people (not you) defend the sugar daddy cheaters by calling out our spending I don’t see the point. Its the Glazers - they’d probably ensure a barren European era for Madrid if they were bought that club.
The problem with this is no one can be sure what City's real spend or net spend is given the charges they are facing.
Perhaps not, but over that period United won a Europa League and 2 League Cups. Meanwhile other clubs that spent far less have won quite a bit with less. All it really shows is how irrelevant the spending is when your club lacks effective management. Excluding City over that period, below are the trophies won by other clubs:
Chelsea: 1 UCL, 1 PL, 1 UEL, 1 FA Cup
Liverpool: 1 UCL, 1 PL, 1 FA Cup, 1 EFL Cup
Arsenal: 2 FA Cups
Leicester: 1 FA Cup
I think the amount City spent, whether it’s accurate or not, is secondary to their management and manager.
Transfer fees will be hard to manipulate because the selling or buying team will also have to report the fees. Unless you are claiming every club who sold to or bought from City were in on the cheating.
Basically, City cannot manipulate transfer fees paid or received in their books, they can only do with agent fee, salaries and bonuses which doesn't affect the reported net spend figures.
I wonder if there is something going under the table with players salaries and bonuses, would that means their players are also cheating and might face tax evasion charges etc.
Ironically his biggest transfer gaff is still when he was at Barelona and pushed for Ibra.
We're literally the textbook club of how to waste money.
We've probably made only 5 good signings in total since SAF retired.
Name them please ?
Yep, I meant at City.