Pep's spending is insane (£941m and counting at City)

reddevilz007

Full Member
Joined
May 12, 2013
Messages
1,742
Dont see all complaints on here. If you had Pep’s pedigree and that a club offered you illimited funds, you would all do the same, pretending like it’s fifa manager.
 

redrobed

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jan 30, 2021
Messages
624
Dont see all complaints on here. If you had Pep’s pedigree and that a club offered you illimited funds, you would all do the same, pretending like it’s fifa manager.
I actually wouldn’t. I’d either win by doing things the right way or I’d choose not to win at all. Where’s the satisfaction in winning by cheating and just buying it?
 

Winzaghi

Full Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2019
Messages
318
Supports
Aston Villa
I actually wouldn’t. I’d either win by doing things the right way or I’d choose not to win at all. Where’s the satisfaction in winning by cheating and just buying it?
Weird that there's not a single manager in football right now that agrees with this sentiment. Every one of them would jump at the chance to be in Pep's position.

What even is the "right way"? The teams with the best players are typically the ones that win the trophies, and the best players cost the most money. If you want to compete for honours, you have to spend and "buy" it. It's been like that for 30 years at least.
 

CG1010

Full Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2012
Messages
3,687
I actually wouldn’t. I’d either win by doing things the right way or I’d choose not to win at all. Where’s the satisfaction in winning by cheating and just buying it?
Yeah that makes no sense at all. You got to take advantage of your position to remain at the top. City are doing that, it will ensure their domination like we did in 1990s and early 2000.
 

cyberman

Full Member
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
37,331
Weird that there's not a single manager in football right now that agrees with this sentiment. Every one of them would jump at the chance to be in Pep's position.

What even is the "right way"? The teams with the best players are typically the ones that win the trophies, and the best players cost the most money. If you want to compete for honours, you have to spend and "buy" it. It's been like that for 30 years at least.
Thats not true. Many managers leave clubs or go elsewhere for a challenge. Klopp turning down Utd, Wenger turning down Madrid, Zidane turning down PSG etc. Grealish staying at Villa follows the same principle.
Being a chequebook manager isnt a new concept and not everybody just goes to the richest club.
 
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
22,545
Location
Somewhere out there
I won't deny that that is very different. Anyway, we had a pretty strong squad already when he came that finished second the year before, and he has spent quite some money as well.

But that fact that he inherited a title winning squad with world class players doesn't mean anything now (or during the last season) when barely any of them are left. 20% is of course a sizeable amount, but again, it's clearly not the difference between having a squad of 22 world class players and our squad. It just isn't.

Anyway, it's obviously not only the money spent that is important, it's what you spend it on. Up until Liverpool's title win, Klopp hadn't spent that much more than what Ole has done now (in net, less), whilst starting with a far worse squad, but he managed to buy a lot of really, really good players fairly cheap.
I actually think Pep’s squad has some glaring weaknesses at this point due to those WC players moving on the past couple of years, but it’s nothing 120m on the likes of Harry Kane won’t fix and probably another 100m on the top of that. He’ll smash through the billion spent barrier at City, even ignoring how Txiki was buying him players like KDB & Sterling for Pep, even before he arrived.
Right now with Aguero gone I’d say his squad absolutely is only 20% better than United’s, but he’s a great manager so he is maximising that.
He finished just 12 points ahead of United remember, and had a draw/loss record against them last season. That about 14% more points over a season. So yeah, ignoring everything else which would be daft, even just spending 20% more than your closest rivals is a massive advantage.
His best player by far is still a player he inherited.

As for Klopp, I think he’s a genius, but is his squad better than Ole’s? Not for me.
 

Kajus

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Nov 25, 2012
Messages
795
I actually wouldn’t. I’d either win by doing things the right way or I’d choose not to win at all. Where’s the satisfaction in winning by cheating and just buying it?
Might be true for a video game where the satisfaction of winning is the only reason to try in the first place. I reckon your opinion on this would change massively if you got paid in private islands for it.
 

Eriku

Full Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
16,123
Location
Oslo, Norway
I won't deny that that is very different. Anyway, we had a pretty strong squad already when he came that finished second the year before, and he has spent quite some money as well.

But that fact that he inherited a title winning squad with world class players doesn't mean anything now (or during the last season) when barely any of them are left. 20% is of course a sizeable amount, but again, it's clearly not the difference between having a squad of 22 world class players and our squad. It just isn't.

Anyway, it's obviously not only the money spent that is important, it's what you spend it on. Up until Liverpool's title win, Klopp hadn't spent that much more than what Ole has done now (in net, less), whilst starting with a far worse squad, but he managed to buy a lot of really, really good players fairly cheap.
Sure it does. For one, his purchases came into a fairly settled dressing room that’s accustomed to winning, and so the torch can be passed. Second of all, he’s spent to stay on top, whereas Ole had to slash the squad to sort wages and cohesion, and then slowly start re-building. We had to take a few steps back before we could start thinking about inching our way forward.

The starting points are quite different. We’ve had to put money into an engine, Pep’s busy tinting the windos and buying fancy rims. It is in no way the same.
 

CoopersDream

Full Member
Joined
May 30, 2021
Messages
428
I actually think Pep’s squad has some glaring weaknesses at this point due to those WC players moving on the past couple of years, but it’s nothing 120m on the likes of Harry Kane won’t fix and probably another 100m on the top of that. He’ll smash through the billion spent barrier at City, even ignoring how Txiki was buying him players like KDB & Sterling for Pep, even before he arrived.
Right now with Aguero gone I’d say his squad absolutely is only 20% better than United’s, but he’s a great manager so he is maximising that.
He finished just 12 points ahead of United remember, and had a draw/loss record against them last season. That about 14% more points over a season. So yeah, ignoring everything else which would be daft, even just spending 20% more than your closest rivals is a massive advantage.
His best player by far is still a player he inherited.

As for Klopp, I think he’s a genius, but is his squad better than Ole’s? Not for me.
Well, I agree that the squad isn't that much better than ours at all. Then we have to ask why people here think he has 22 world class players, and that anyone would win with that team. The answer to that question then must be that Pep makes a lot of them look a lot better than they are, which I think is fair to say. The fact that City can spend more than any other club is what it is (cheating, some would say), but the biggest difference maker right now is still Pep. When he goes and they get in a manager of the quality of the previous managers it will show.

As for Klopp, it's hard to say really, his players have definitely shown that they can play on a much higher level than our current group of players, but it might just be down to him being one of the best managers in the world, and I would agree that the squads the somewhat comparable.

Sure it does. For one, his purchases came into a fairly settled dressing room that’s accustomed to winning, and so the torch can be passed. Second of all, he’s spent to stay on top, whereas Ole had to slash the squad to sort wages and cohesion, and then slowly start re-building. We had to take a few steps back before we could start thinking about inching our way forward.

The starting points are quite different. We’ve had to put money into an engine, Pep’s busy tinting the windos and buying fancy rims. It is in no way the same.
Yeah, sure the starting point were somewhat different. Pep's starting point isn't really relevant at this point though, which is my point, as almost all of those players are gone. That he has spent to stay on top is neither here nor there, as he had to spend take them to the top first (which we have tried to do as well) in order to spend to stay at the top. They weren't on top when he was hired, no matter how much we all like to say that was the case.
 
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
22,545
Location
Somewhere out there
. When he goes and they get in a manager of the quality of the previous managers it will show.
Considering how well they planned for Pep and the quite frankly insane amount of money they must have thrown at him to get him to go Barca > Bayern > City, you’re being extremely naive if you don’t think City will be bringing in another incredible World Class coach when he leaves. They’ve already proven they can even nab a coach off Bayern, they’ll do that again whatever the club cause money talks.
 

Zen86

Full Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2007
Messages
13,871
Location
Sunny Manc
I was curious, so I decided to map out transfer spend from the 06/07 season through to the 20/21 season. Data was sourced from transfermarkt. Note that each point on the chart is a 5 year average of transfer spend (allows us to see trends more easily). I also dropped in league finish for each season on the chart also.

It just shows how little we invested in the team prior to Fergie leaving, meanwhile City have consistently invested and have reaped the rewards of that. We've basically been playing catchup since then. Liverpool's league win is commendable considering their rather low net spend. Chelsea's also appears quite low, but it's padded out by player sales.

 

SuperiorXI

Full Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2012
Messages
14,450
Location
Manchester, England
I was curious, so I decided to map out transfer spend from the 06/07 season through to the 20/21 season. Data was sourced from transfermarkt. Note that each point on the chart is a 5 year average of transfer spend (allows us to see trends more easily). I also dropped in league finish for each season on the chart also.

It just shows how little we invested in the team prior to Fergie leaving, meanwhile City have consistently invested and have reaped the rewards of that. We've basically been playing catchup since then. Liverpool's league win is commendable considering their rather low net spend. Chelsea's also appears quite low, but it's padded out by player sales.

This one of the things people miss when they talk about United's spend. Not only have we heavily spent on crap, but that crap has since left the club, our selling has always been very poor. Even when we sold Ronaldo, that was a great price for Real Madrid (in hindsight).
 

Rajiztar

Full Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2019
Messages
2,102
Supports
Chelsea
Pep s spending is insane. Nobody will question him as long as he wins them titles. It's the reality. Chelsea did too but only difference is chelsea not able identify a manager who they can hold on and create the dynasty.

But City just able to create the atmosphere which pep can be comfortable with and give him the resources he needed.

If any of united Liverpool chelsea hold pep s city back to win major titles in coming seasons they will be forced to change. It's only way to stop city juggernaut.

Already many questioned his lineup against chelsea in champions league final. Just have to stop city to win major titles in one or two coming seasons to force them to take action against pep.

Chelsea will be ready coming season hope united and Liverpool too to challenge city.
 

Eriku

Full Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
16,123
Location
Oslo, Norway
Well, I agree that the squad isn't that much better than ours at all. Then we have to ask why people here think he has 22 world class players, and that anyone would win with that team. The answer to that question then must be that Pep makes a lot of them look a lot better than they are, which I think is fair to say. The fact that City can spend more than any other club is what it is (cheating, some would say), but the biggest difference maker right now is still Pep. When he goes and they get in a manager of the quality of the previous managers it will show.

As for Klopp, it's hard to say really, his players have definitely shown that they can play on a much higher level than our current group of players, but it might just be down to him being one of the best managers in the world, and I would agree that the squads the somewhat comparable.


Yeah, sure the starting point were somewhat different. Pep's starting point isn't really relevant at this point though, which is my point, as almost all of those players are gone. That he has spent to stay on top is neither here nor there, as he had to spend take them to the top first (which we have tried to do as well) in order to spend to stay at the top. They weren't on top when he was hired, no matter how much we all like to say that was the case.
What? They won the league twice in the years leading up to his reign. They were definitely cemented as one of the top clubs in England by the time Pep arrived.

And you seem to be missing the point about the starting point. It takes way more money to build something rather than just maintaining it. City had been sorting out purchases with Pep in mind before he even showed up. It’s not really comparable.
 

reddevilz007

Full Member
Joined
May 12, 2013
Messages
1,742
What if Pep agreed to manage us before he went to City?
Would the Glazers bow to his demands and have Woodward work harder to get Pep’s players?
If so, would you still be complaining “if” we spent that much?
 

Fluctuation0161

Full Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2016
Messages
8,156
Location
Manchester
Assuming transfermarkt data is accurate, net spend since Pep arrival is €619.96mil for City and €553.30mil for Utd.
So yeah they outspend anybody else, but 12% more than town rivals over 5 season doesn't feel like such a game-ending cheat.
So inheriting the strongest squad in the league and then outspending every other club is not a game-ending cheat?

OK mate.
 

Zen86

Full Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2007
Messages
13,871
Location
Sunny Manc
What if Pep agreed to manage us before he went to City?
Would the Glazers bow to his demands and have Woodward work harder to get Pep’s players?
If so, would you still be complaining “if” we spent that much?
We wouldn’t be spending that much because we don’t have unlimited funds.
 

kaiser1

Full Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2018
Messages
1,949
Supports
Bayern Munich
So inheriting the strongest squad in the league and then outspending every other club is not a game-ending cheat?

OK mate.
This strongest squad in the league was one of the oldest in the league 18th oldest out of 20 teams and finished 4th level on points with Man Utd on 66points

I will like to know how a manager was supposed to play Hart Sagna Clichy Yaya, Kompany Silva, Zabaleta Fernando etc who all retired or went into semi-retirement within 3yrs of Pep
 

Rampant Red Rodriguez

Scared of women, so hates them.
Joined
Aug 7, 2019
Messages
972
We basically didn't have the correct manager to spend our money limits wisely and held onto the old players for too long. Moyes and LvG were a waste of time for transfers, Mourinho too tbh.
 

Fluctuation0161

Full Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2016
Messages
8,156
Location
Manchester
This strongest squad in the league was one of the oldest in the league 18th oldest out of 20 teams and finished 4th level on points with Man Utd on 66points

I will like to know how a manager was supposed to play Hart Sagna Clichy Yaya, Kompany Silva, Zabaleta Fernando etc who all retired or went into semi-retirement within 3yrs of Pep
Sorry but your argument is inaccurate.

The strongest squad had underachieved the season before Pep arrived. After being top of the league until Pep was announced around Christmas. They then crumbled and stopped playing for their manager. Pep had multiple premiership winners in the squad when he joined.

The core of his squad over his tenure were already there. KDB, Sterling, Silva, Aguero, Kompany, Stones. Yet he still had to outspend every other club.
 
Last edited:

stevoc

Full Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2011
Messages
19,836
Yeah that makes no sense at all. You got to take advantage of your position to remain at the top. City are doing that, it will ensure their domination like we did in 1990s and early 2000.
You can't compare City's spending now to United's in the 90's.
 

kaiser1

Full Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2018
Messages
1,949
Supports
Bayern Munich
Sorry but your argument is inaccurate.

The strongest squad had underachieved the season before Pep arrived. After being top of the league until Pep was announced around Christmas. They then crumbled and stopped playing for their manager. Pep had multiple premiership winners in the squad when he joined.

The core of his squad over his tenure were already there. KDB, Sterling, Silva, Aguero, Kompany, Stones. Yet he still had to outspend every other club.
Spurs were also top of the league around Xmas last season before collapsing and the coach was fired. Man Utd was top of table sometime in January. Yet you wont say any of these were the strongest in the league last season. No team is called strongest team because they topped the table at Xmas

The core of the squad were there but playing way below what we have known them to be in the last 4 seasons. Sterling and Stones were routinely laughed at on these pages. Kompany mostly injured. Silva and KdB reached new levels of performance under Pep
 

Fluctuation0161

Full Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2016
Messages
8,156
Location
Manchester
Spurs were also top of the league around Xmas last season before collapsing and the coach was fired. Man Utd was top of table sometime in January. Yet you wont say any of these were the strongest in the league last season. No team is called strongest team because they topped the table at Xmas

The core of the squad were there but playing way below what we have known them to be in the last 4 seasons. Sterling and Stones were routinely laughed at on these pages. Kompany mostly injured. Silva and KdB reached new levels of performance under Pep
No, they were the strongest squad because they had won 2 of the previous 4 premiership titles before Pep arrived. Pretty simple really if you follow the Premier league.

PLUS the season before he arrived they were top at Christmas period until they imploded because a new manager waw announced 6 months early!

Silva and KDB were quality before Pep arrived. At this stage I wonder if you even follow the Premier league or just blindly follow Pep.
 
Joined
Jan 1, 2021
Messages
872
Pretty simple really if you follow the Premier league.
This is a very funny snide remark to make when you're trying to say their squad was the strongest in the league in 2016 because it still had a whole bunch of 30+ players who won it in 2012.

And Silva and De Bruyne were both very obviously better from 2017-19 than they'd been before. Most people would have laughed at the idea of playing either of them at number 8 early in their City careers, let alone putting up a hundred points in a season with both of them together.
 

Fluctuation0161

Full Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2016
Messages
8,156
Location
Manchester
This is a very funny snide remark to make when you're trying to say their squad was the strongest in the league in 2016 because it still had a whole bunch of 30+ players who won it in 2012.

And Silva and De Bruyne were both very obviously better from 2017-19 than they'd been before. Most people would have laughed at the idea of playing either of them at number 8 early in their City careers, let alone putting up a hundred points in a season with both of them together.
Look at the squads of the Premiership in 2016 and tell me which club had the best squad in the league.

In 2015, before Pep arrived, De Bruyne was announced as one of the players on the longlist for the Ballon d'Or award, alongside Aguero and Yaya Touré. So the rest of your post is inaccurate or irrelevant at best.
 
Last edited:

padr81

Full Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2015
Messages
11,880
Supports
Man City
I actually wouldn’t. I’d either win by doing things the right way or I’d choose not to win at all. Where’s the satisfaction in winning by cheating and just buying it?
Yeah but you think people only know who graham souness is because of his United opinions so you'd get relegated regardless what way you tried.
 

padr81

Full Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2015
Messages
11,880
Supports
Man City
No, they were the strongest squad because they had won 2 of the previous 4 premiership titles before Pep arrived. Pretty simple really if you follow the Premier league.

PLUS the season before he arrived they were top at Christmas period until they imploded because a new manager waw announced 6 months early!

Silva and KDB were quality before Pep arrived. At this stage I wonder if you even follow the Premier league or just blindly follow Pep.
No we hadn't. We won 1 in 4 titles.

We also were never top at Christmas in the Leicester season, last time we were top was gameweek 14, end of november.

Pep was announced 8 weeks later on 1st of February after game 24. A full 10 games after we lost top spot.

People on here laughed at a Silva, KDB midfield when Pep first tried it, to say anything else or anyone expected it even pundits is a lie.

For someone who has went in on someone for not watching the pl you got everything you countered him with wrong (as usual I might add)
 

CoopersDream

Full Member
Joined
May 30, 2021
Messages
428
What? They won the league twice in the years leading up to his reign. They were definitely cemented as one of the top clubs in England by the time Pep arrived.

And you seem to be missing the point about the starting point. It takes way more money to build something rather than just maintaining it. City had been sorting out purchases with Pep in mind before he even showed up. It’s not really comparable.
What are you on about? I absolutely do not miss the point. Of course they had a better starting point than Mourinho had for us, there's no doubt about that. That's neither here nor there. The fact that they are regarded to have so much better a squad than us on this forum at this point in time, a squad which barely have any player left from that before he arrived, certainly make it seem like they either buy a lot better than us, or that Pep gets much more out of his players than us. Take your pick.

Considering how well they planned for Pep and the quite frankly insane amount of money they must have thrown at him to get him to go Barca > Bayern > City, you’re being extremely naive if you don’t think City will be bringing in another incredible World Class coach when he leaves. They’ve already proven they can even nab a coach off Bayern, they’ll do that again whatever the club cause money talks.
I'm sure they will go for a very good coach after Pep. There aren't many around that are as good though, possibly only Klopp and Tuchel right now, and I doubt they will get any of them. I think wherever they go after Pep it will be step down, quite a big one at that.
 
Last edited:

CG1010

Full Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2012
Messages
3,687
You can't compare City's spending now to United's in the 90's.
Yes it is not comparable at all. What I am saying is through their spending they can dominate the PL like we did back then.
 

Eriku

Full Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
16,123
Location
Oslo, Norway
What are you on about? I absolutely do not miss the point. Of course they had a better starting point than Mourinho had for us, there's no doubt about that. That's neither here nor there. The fact that they are regarded to have so much better a squad than us on this forum at this point in time, a squad which barely have any player left from that before he arrived, certainly make it seem like they either buy a lot better than us, or that Pep gets much more out of his players than us. Take your pick.
Or that they didn’t need as much investment as us because their starting point was far better. Each season doesn’t exist in a vacuum, which is why I wouldn’t go along with the idea that it doesn’t matter that Pep started with a stronger side when you compare his spending to ours.

Also, you just gloss over the fact that you claimed they were not on top when he took over. I mean, they hadn’t won the league the season before, but 2/5 were won by City in the five years leading up to Pep taking over. They were as on top as any side could claim to be in the Premier League at that point.

I’ll leave it at that.
 

CoopersDream

Full Member
Joined
May 30, 2021
Messages
428
Or that they didn’t need as much investment as us because their starting point was far better. Each season doesn’t exist in a vacuum, which is why I wouldn’t go along with the idea that it doesn’t matter that Pep started with a stronger side when you compare his spending to ours.

Also, you just gloss over the fact that you claimed they were not on top when he took over. I mean, they hadn’t won the league the season before, but 2/5 were won by City in the five years leading up to Pep taking over. They were as on top as any side could claim to be in the Premier League at that point.

I’ll leave it at that.
Replacing every player in a title winning squad with players of equal quality is going to require as much investment as buying those same players replacing not-as-good players, no? I do know that the fact that Pep won the title in the second and third year after his arrival was greatly helped because of the fact that he inherited some fantastic players in addition to his spending. Not as much anymore, which is my point.

Sure, they had won two of the five previous years. Kind of like how we had won two of the five previous years when van Gaal took over us. Don't think van Gaal took over a team "on the top" either. City definitely had some really good players at the time, no one is denying that, but they had an old squad requiring significant investment.
 

Eriku

Full Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
16,123
Location
Oslo, Norway
Replacing every player in a title winning squad with players of equal quality is going to require as much investment as buying those same players replacing not-as-good players, no? I do know that the fact that Pep won the title in the second and third year after his arrival was greatly helped because of the fact that he inherited some fantastic players in addition to his spending. Not as much anymore, which is my point.

Sure, they had won two of the five previous years. Kind of like how we had won two of the five previous years when van Gaal took over us. Don't think van Gaal took over a team "on the top" either. City definitely had some really good players at the time, no one is denying that, but they had an old squad requiring significant investment.
They could slowly replace, whereas we had to hack and slash, sell at a loss, all while we’re not even very competitive in the first place. We had to spend almost as much as them to just stop the bleeding and to start to make tentative steps towards becoming a better side.

Van Gaal inherited the title winners minus Scholes, Rio, Vidic, Evra. We lost a major part of our winning culture, they retained theirs and added significantly to it.

I really don’t see how you can equate the two… but I’m done trying.
 
Last edited:

CoopersDream

Full Member
Joined
May 30, 2021
Messages
428
They could slowly replace, whereas we had to hack and slash, sell at a loss, all while we’re not even very competitive in the first place. We had to spend almost as much as them to just stop the bleeding and to start to make tentative steps towards becoming a better side.

Van Gaal inherited the title winners minus Scholes, Rio, Vidic, Evra. We lost a major part of our winning culture, they retained theirs and added significantly to it.

I really don’t see how you can equate the two… but I’m done trying.
They didn't slowly replace their squad though, Pep slashed and bought players even more quickly than what we did. Let me rephrase the question: if we had bought the exact same players as Pep has done in the past five years, would we or would we not have a squad similar to theirs now? All while having spent a similar amount to what we actually have done as of now.

Yes, again, I realize that there is a difference. I don't equate the two, I'm just making a point of saying that they were "on top" because they had won 2/5 last Premierships doesn't really mean that much.
 

Eriku

Full Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
16,123
Location
Oslo, Norway
They didn't slowly replace their squad though, Pep slashed and bought players even more quickly than what we did. Let me rephrase the question: if we had bought the exact same players as Pep has done in the past five years, would we or would we not have a squad similar to theirs now? All while having spent a similar amount to what we actually have done as of now.

Yes, again, I realize that there is a difference. I don't equate the two, I'm just making a point of saying that they were "on top" because they had won 2/5 last Premierships doesn't really mean that much.
Agree to disagree, I guess. Him buying as many players as he did at the pace he did was a consequence of him being able to splash on a fullback, and then do it again the year after without having to care about balancing a budget, or it coming at the expense of a different transfer target. Same shit with the goalkeeper once Bravo wasn’t good enough. It wasn’t because they were in dire need of upgrades, it was because Pep was tweaking the team. We’re only just arriving at the point where we can consider ourselves being close to that, after a 3 year rehaul.

At any rate, we’re clearly not going to agree on this point. Have a good one.
 

Thunderhead

Full Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2016
Messages
3,154
Supports
City
Agree to disagree, I guess. Him buying as many players as he did at the pace he did was a consequence of him being able to splash on a fullback, and then do it again the year after without having to care about balancing a budget, or it coming at the expense of a different transfer target. Same shit with the goalkeeper once Bravo wasn’t good enough. It wasn’t because they were in dire need of upgrades, it was because Pep was tweaking the team. We’re only just arriving at the point where we can consider ourselves being close to that, after a 3 year rehaul.

At any rate, we’re clearly not going to agree on this point. Have a good one.
different strategy, we bought 13 players for the first team in the first 2 years under Pep averaging around £30m per player, United bought 7 players averaging around £38m per player, think the difference was about £95m net over the 2 season, maybe if United hadn't paid 95m for Pogba and 75 for Lukaku you could have got 4 or 5 more quality players which would have bulked out your squad
 

redrobed

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jan 30, 2021
Messages
624
Yeah but you think people only know who graham souness is because of his United opinions so you'd get relegated regardless what way you tried.
We’d all get relegated to be honest bro regardless of who among us knew Souness used to play football before his sole purpose in life became hating on Utd.
 

AjaxCunian

vexingwijsneus
Joined
Mar 10, 2021
Messages
4,230
Supports
Ajax & United
Why is the caf so obsessed with Pep's spending as if United (Van Gaal, Mourinho, Ole) aren't the closest ones to him. At least he has numerous trophies to show for all that spending, entertaining football, league titles.

We havent won a trophy in 4 years and consolate losing to Villareal in the Europa League or Leicester in the FA Cup with "progress". It is very true that Pep too, needs to have some of the best squads in the world in order to perform. Spent magnificently at City, inherited great players at Barcelona/Bayern. But what is really the point?
 
Joined
Jan 1, 2021
Messages
872
Look at the squads of the Premiership in 2016 and tell me which club had the best squad in the league.

In 2015, before Pep arrived, De Bruyne was announced as one of the players on the longlist for the Ballon d'Or award, alongside Aguero and Yaya Touré. So the rest of your post is inaccurate or irrelevant at best.
It was a good squad, obviously. Probably the best in the league.

That's not my point. You were talking down to the other guy because he said the difference between City and United's spending in the last five years isn't as massive as some people (mostly Mourinho) would have you believe and definitely not some kind of "game-ending cheat", even accounting for the difference in squad quality when Guardiola came in. United had plenty of opportunities to catch up, they just spent the money horribly.

De Bruyne was on the longlist for the Ballon D'Or in 2015, sure. Again, what does that have to do with the other poster's point that he hit another level, i.e. went from being a Ballon D'Or longlist player (looking at the list from 2015 incidentally tells me City had 5 players on there, Chelsea 4 and United 3, which again isn't a gaping chasm - and the players on there include Bony, Willian, Rooney and Memphis, so not a particularly helpful list anyway) to the best in the league after that 2017 change in role?

Be better at this.
 
Joined
Jan 1, 2021
Messages
872
No we hadn't. We won 1 in 4 titles.
Also a very valid point, easily confirmable for someone who "follows the Premier League" :wenger:.

But we can give Fluctuation the benefit of the doubt here and assume they meant 2 of the last 4 titles at the time Guardiola was announced as the incoming manager. Which is basically just skewing the numbers to suit your argument, but hey!