I think so. Pep is very cautious in that he wants multiple expensive players for the same position in case of injury/rotation. He also isn't huge on youth so there's that too. A big part of him taking the City job was unlimited resources as a fallback option. I think if we were really aggressive in getting him he'd have gotten such assurances at us too.Here's a discussion for you all...
Would United have spent as much as City had if we had Pep in charge? I think the answer is most likely.
Yeah I wonder how Sterling and Fernandinho would perform for Mou. Meanwhile poor Jose has to work with Pogba and Lukaku.We finished 2nd. The only team that finished above us spent more money than us. If Jose could finish 2nd with that dross of a squad, imagine what he would have achieved with Silva, KDB, Aguero, Fernandinho, Sterling, Kompany, etc.
.
No, simply because United do not have the funds available to allow for an unrestricted spending spree. Same is true of any football club the world over besides PSG.Here's a discussion for you all...
Would United have spent as much as City had if we had Pep in charge? I think the answer is most likely.
Yeah.....keep following the biased media. Hazard’s best season ever was under Jose. Ozil’s most productive season in his entire career was at Madrid under Jose.Yeah I wonder how Sterling and Fernandinho would perform for Mou. Meanwhile poor Jose has to work with Pogba and Lukaku.
Peps only been here for 2 years, we’ve been operating in the inflated market for sure, but even if you assume we weren’t and just assess his transfers, the value for money is there. Spending lots of money is easy, having a good hit rate and turning them into a top side isn’t a given. In reality he’s taken the squad we had to what we did last year in £340m net spend, of which Laporte £60m was bought after the title was wrapped up and Mendy £50m was injured all year.I’ve been having a look at the true cost of the City squad since Guardiola arrived and it really is insane. United are always perceived as big spenders. The number of articles I read where they go ‘Pogba, who cost £90m’ or ‘Lukaku, who hasn’t lived up to his £90m transfer’, when he cost £75m.
These transfer valuations are from transfermarkt. Since Guardiola joined City he has spent £540m. That is £150m more than United in the same space of time. And this doesn’t consider how inflated the market has gone over the last 3 years. I think we can say prices have more than doubled since his first season where he spent £192m.
Remember when they took the moral high ground last year over Sanchez’s wages? Money over Pep? Well they still managed to spend £285m on players.
When you consider the main core of his team was already there - De Bruyne, Aguero, D. Silva, Fernandinho, Sterling, Otamendi and Kompany - that is mental.
I don’t get care how wonderful his football is meant to be (personally I find watching a team with 70% possession quite boring), he can never be regarded as the best managers that has ever lived with his record in the transfer window.
It was the same when he was at Barcelona. He signed Zlatan for £59m plus Eto’o. That was basically £100m back in 2010!
He has spent insane amount of money there is no two ways about it but he has also made sure he created something special with that. I never have managers spending money , it's just when fans for their comfort call Jose a cheque book manager and Pep is not. Heck even klopp is nothing but a cheque book manager.Peps only been here for 2 years, we’ve been operating in the inflated market for sure, but even if you assume we weren’t and just assess his transfers, the value for money is there. Spending lots of money is easy, having a good hit rate and turning them into a top side isn’t a given. In reality he’s taken the squad we had to what we did last year in £340m net spend, of which Laporte £60m was bought after the title was wrapped up and Mendy £50m was injured all year.
He deserves a touch of credit perhaps. If not just for his good eye in the market!
Season 16/17:
Sane £45m
Stones £50m
Jesus £28m
Gundogan £24m
Nolito £16m
Bravo £16m
Moreno £4m
Zinchenko £2m
In: £185m Out: £32m Net: £160m
Season 17/18:
Laporte £58m
Mendy £50m
Walker £50m
Bernardo £45m
Ederson £36m
Danilo £27m
In: £266m Out: £86m Net: £180m
Nothing there is nuts.
To a City fan... why because you haven’t bought a player for over £60m?Peps only been here for 2 years, we’ve been operating in the inflated market for sure, but even if you assume we weren’t and just assess his transfers, the value for money is there. Spending lots of money is easy, having a good hit rate and turning them into a top side isn’t a given. In reality he’s taken the squad we had to what we did last year in £340m net spend, of which Laporte £60m was bought after the title was wrapped up and Mendy £50m was injured all year.
He deserves a touch of credit perhaps. If not just for his good eye in the market!
Season 16/17:
Sane £45m
Stones £50m
Jesus £28m
Gundogan £24m
Nolito £16m
Bravo £16m
Moreno £4m
Zinchenko £2m
In: £185m Out: £32m Net: £160m
Season 17/18:
Laporte £58m
Mendy £50m
Walker £50m
Bernardo £45m
Ederson £36m
Danilo £27m
In: £266m Out: £86m Net: £180m
Nothing there is nuts.
Peps only been here for 2 years, we’ve been operating in the inflated market for sure, but even if you assume we weren’t and just assess his transfers, the value for money is there. Spending lots of money is easy, having a good hit rate and turning them into a top side isn’t a given. In reality he’s taken the squad we had to what we did last year in £340m net spend, of which Laporte £60m was bought after the title was wrapped up and Mendy £50m was injured all year.
He deserves a touch of credit perhaps. If not just for his good eye in the market!
Season 16/17:
Sane £45m
Stones £50m
Jesus £28m
Gundogan £24m
Nolito £16m
Bravo £16m
Moreno £4m
Zinchenko £2m
In: £185m Out: £32m Net: £160m
Season 17/18:
Laporte £58m
Mendy £50m
Walker £50m
Bernardo £45m
Ederson £36m
Danilo £27m
In: £266m Out: £86m Net: £180m
Nothing there is nuts.
City were the primary contributors to the inflation of the transfer market which, coincidently, came about directly after the arrival of one Shiek Monsour and his takeover of City. Pep has since continued the 'spend ludicrous amounts of money in the transfer market' trend set by previous managers of your club.Peps only been here for 2 years, we’ve been operating in the inflated market for sure, but even if you assume we weren’t and just assess his transfers, the value for money is there. Spending lots of money is easy, having a good hit rate and turning them into a top side isn’t a given. In reality he’s taken the squad we had to what we did last year in £340m net spend, of which Laporte £60m was bought after the title was wrapped up and Mendy £50m was injured all year.
He deserves a touch of credit perhaps. If not just for his good eye in the market!
Season 16/17:
Sane £45m
Stones £50m
Jesus £28m
Gundogan £24m
Nolito £16m
Bravo £16m
Moreno £4m
Zinchenko £2m
In: £185m Out: £32m Net: £160m
Season 17/18:
Laporte £58m
Mendy £50m
Walker £50m
Bernardo £45m
Ederson £36m
Danilo £27m
In: £266m Out: £86m Net: £180m
Nothing there is nuts.
So basically Jose would have had 101 points with last years' City tram if I'm correct, based on your calculations?Yeah.....keep following the biased media. Hazard’s best season ever was under Jose. Ozil’s most productive season in his entire career was at Madrid under Jose.
The whole noise by the British media that Jose can’t coach attacking players is a myth pulled out of a baboon’s rectum.
You could more than make a case about City being a primary contributor to wages' inflation back in the day, but why would it be true for transfer fees?City were the primary contributors to the inflation of the transfer market which, coincidently, came about directly after the arrival of one Shiek Monsour and his takeover of City. Pep has since continued the 'spend ludicrous amounts of money in the transfer market' trend set by previous managers of your club.
Well it's not like anyone forced United not to sell Darmian or not to extend Rojo's contract for a year or two, is it?That net spend thing has to be the most tiring cliche ever used whenever your club gets accused of over spending, just revert to net spending and world is great again and you didn't spend a lot
Thought we're talking about City crazy spending here, being the only English club who spent +200m in one summer and all that. United didn't spend anything higher than 150m each summer for years.Well it's not like anyone forced United not to sell Darmian or not to extend Rojo's contract for a year or two, is it?
Are you serious?You could more than make a case about City being a primary contributor to wages' inflation back in the day, but why would it be true for transfer fees?
No it's not. Get your facts on first.United's spending since Ferguson left has been just as ridiculous.
I don't know how United fans can judge Man City, to be honest.
I totally agree. Just because City have spent a couple of million more doesn't mean United should be losing to the likes of West Brom and Newcastle, and finishing whatever amount of points behind City.United's spending since Ferguson left has been just as ridiculous.
I don't know how United fans can judge Man City, to be honest.
This is a bit of an ironic comment given that one of the main reasons the market is inflated is due to City over spending on players. No one else was going to pay £50m for the likes of Stones, Walker or Mendy. Now it's standard. Guess why?Peps only been here for 2 years, we’ve been operating in the inflated market for sure, but even if you assume we weren’t and just assess his transfers, the value for money is there. Spending lots of money is easy, having a good hit rate and turning them into a top side isn’t a given. In reality he’s taken the squad we had to what we did last year in £340m net spend, of which Laporte £60m was bought after the title was wrapped up and Mendy £50m was injured all year.
He deserves a touch of credit perhaps. If not just for his good eye in the market!
Season 16/17:
Sane £45m
Stones £50m
Jesus £28m
Gundogan £24m
Nolito £16m
Bravo £16m
Moreno £4m
Zinchenko £2m
In: £185m Out: £32m Net: £160m
Season 17/18:
Laporte £58m
Mendy £50m
Walker £50m
Bernardo £45m
Ederson £36m
Danilo £27m
In: £266m Out: £86m Net: £180m
Nothing there is nuts.
He's slowed down to let us catch up but we're still bottling thatI thought this thread was bumped by City fan to tell how United have overspent City in this transfer window.
Well yes.Are you serious?
They have spent a lot, but they have spent quite wisely. Bar Bravo and probably Laporte and Gundogan, they could get more money that they spent on for every player they have signed. And bar Bravo, every signing has been a hit.To a City fan... why because you haven’t bought a player for over £60m?
You still have 7 players in the starting line up that Pep had before he joined. So he has spent over £500m to fill 5 players in his first 11. How can you not see that as mental?
Who buys a £58m defender when a defender is out for a couple of months? They don’t even play in the same position.
Net spend la.
I don’t get why City fan deny you have spent far more than anyone else, and consistently for 10 years now.
Since SAF left, United has spent more than any other club bar City and possibly PSG.No it's not. Get your facts on first.
United didn't spend any thing higher than 150m each summer since Fergie retired. That's a very ordinary budget and most clubs even spend higher than that. You had a crap summer past year and still ended up spending about 170-180m. Liverpool spent +170m this summer as well. 150m isn't a high budget.
City are the only English club who spent +200m in one summer.
United didn’t spend higher than 150m? Really?if swap player doesn’t count as spending , then you should compare the net spending.Thought we're talking about City crazy spending here, being the only English club who spent +200m in one summer and all that. United didn't spend anything higher than 150m each summer for years.
Again the net spending cliche. I didn't even use it and said we spent 150m each summer but if I ended up using it then LVG had got rid of +20 players in his 2 seasons and added only 9 and the total net spend in the 2 years together was 103m. It was only Mourinho who didn't sell much thus thus the net spend in each one of his 2 years was 140-150m, still very average, and still there net spend is the most tiring cliche ever used o defend your club. I did try to avoid it from the start bcause the only one who should care about is the club board to evaluate the resources and financial position of the club.United didn’t spend higher than 150m? Really?if swap player doesn’t count as spending , then you should compare the net spending.
Yes because the market has inflated.They have spent a lot, but they have spent quite wisely. Bar Bravo and probably Laporte and Gundogan, they could get more money that they spent on for every player they have signed. And bar Bravo, every signing has been a hit.
So has for us.Yes because the market has inflated.
When we signed Lukaku last summer, the three most expensive transfers of British football history were all United signings (since then Morata and Mahrez have overtaken Di Maria by a couple hundred thousand pounds). We are as much to blame for the inflation of the market as anyone.City were the primary contributors to the inflation of the transfer market which, coincidently, came about directly after the arrival of one Shiek Monsour and his takeover of City. Pep has since continued the 'spend ludicrous amounts of money in the transfer market' trend set by previous managers of your club.
