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.
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?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.
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.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.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?
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.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.
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.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.
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.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?
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.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.
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.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.
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.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.
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.. When he goes and they get in a manager of the quality of the previous managers it will show.
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).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.
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.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.
So inheriting the strongest squad in the league and then outspending every other club is not a game-ending cheat?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.
We wouldn’t be spending that much because we don’t have unlimited funds.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?
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 66pointsSo inheriting the strongest squad in the league and then outspending every other club is not a game-ending cheat?
OK mate.
Sorry but your argument is inaccurate.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
You can't compare City's spending now to United's in the 90's.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.
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 XmasSorry 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.
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.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
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.Pretty simple really if you follow the Premier league.
Look at the squads of the Premiership in 2016 and tell me which club had the best squad in the 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.
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.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?
No we hadn't. We won 1 in 4 titles.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.
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.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.
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.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.
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.You can't compare City's spending now to United's in the 90's.
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.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.
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.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.
Ah my mistake fair enough mate.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.
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.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 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.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.
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.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.
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 squadAgree 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.
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.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.
It was a good squad, obviously. Probably the best in the league.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.
Also a very valid point, easily confirmable for someone who "follows the Premier League" .No we hadn't. We won 1 in 4 titles.