Official Football Thread - 11/12

[Fleka]

cityfan31, no hate for you or Manchester City, but no matter how much millions you spend, United will always be bigger and better football club.

[cityfan31]

cityfan31, no hate for you or Manchester City, but no matter how much millions you spend, United will always be bigger and better football club.

Football didn't start in 1992 you know. United weren't even the biggest club in England until the Premier League was introduced. In the 70s City and United were fairly well matched.

The millions we have spent?

Lets examine some of their players:

De gea: 22 million
Ferdinind: 30 million (in 2005? - with inflation that is the equivalent of about 50 million)
Carrick: 18 million
Nani: 18 million
Rooney: 30 million (2007?)
Berbatov: 32.5 million

I can't be bothered to think of anymore, but the facts are this. They produced a group of good young players in 1999 and since then they have bought success just like anyone else. Who was the last good young player they produced? Every player in their team they bought from someone else. They are a bigger and better club only because they've been cash-rich for years on the back of the Premier League TV and CLeague money. This lie that they don't spend money, how much have they spent this summer? More than City, that's for sure.

Give us 20 years and we'll be bigger.

[Fleka]

I never said United don`t spend millions. Every club that is succussfull must spend millions. I`m just saying that United is an football icon, and City is not. And paying Yaya Toure that kind of money is just plain stupid.

[momentsgolden]

De gea: 22 million
Nani: 18 million
Rooney: 30 million (2007?)

What you forget is that De Gea is 20, half the age of VDS. Rooney was 18 when he was bought and Nani was nowhere near as talented as he is.

And you say who did we develop? Have you looked at the team recently? Jonny Evans (who i personally hate) is a United product. The Da Silva twins are products of United's youth team. Tom Cleverly, Darren Fletcher, Walbeck, Macheda, Diof, Pogba are ALL products of United's youth system.

What we mean by a "flawed" City policy is the propensity to target ready-made, low risk, high cost 1st team players. Hell, even Barcelona, famed for its "youth" policy buys 16 year olds at astronomical prices. Its about taking the leap of faith such that you ensure the players bought suit the direction the club wants to go. I do concede however, City could pip United to the Title if the Glazers stay in charge. *sigh

[MikeNUFC]

On another note looking I have no ESPN so can't watch any football till Match of the day....Fun. Hope Newcastle win though.

Pub? That's where I'm headed.

I feel like a kid at Christmas today. So excited. I fancy our chances as well (kiss of death).

My hopes for the season:
-Newcastle make the top 10
-Man U, Liverpool and Sunderland are relegated
-Nani breaks a leg
-De Jong breaks a leg (karma)
-Rooney breaks a leg
-Gerrard breaks a leg
-Tiote is elected President of the USA

[Innovation]

Give us 20 years and we'll be bigger.

Nah, you won't. You have to hope that the owners don't sell up, because if they do, where will Manchester City be? Who could handle that upkeep with the wages you're offering players? The only reason why big name players like Agureo went to Manchester City was for the big pay cheque. Remember Robinho? He could have went to Chelsea and got Champions League football but instead, he went to Manchester City. I wonder why? He didn't even enjoy his time there and left. Tevez isn't even enjoying his time there anymore, he even handed in a transfer request lol.

I don't ever see Manchester City accomplishing a treble like United did.

fuck man united and they whole fans
tell em lello said they can kiss my whole ass!


Drogba > Torres, love em both, chelsea 4 life, let the season BEGIN..... BEGIN..... BEGIN

I'm a huge Chelsea fan and I love Drogba but Torres is the better player. Let's hope this season Torres will shine and show why he is one of the best strikers in the world. On form, there's not a better striker than Torres.

[MikeNUFC]

When both players are at their best, Drogba is the better player. Slightly more to his game and does more for the team as a whole.

Plus, Torres pisses me off as a person.

[cityfan31]

Give us 20 years and we'll be bigger.

Nah, you won't. You have to hope that the owners don't sell up, because if they do, where will Manchester City be? Who could handle that upkeep with the wages you're offering players? The only reason why big name players like Agureo went to Manchester City was for the big pay cheque. Remember Robinho? He could have went to Chelsea and got Champions League football but instead, he went to Manchester City. I wonder why? He didn't even enjoy his time there and left. Tevez isn't even enjoying his time there anymore, he even handed in a transfer request lol.

I don't ever see Manchester City accomplishing a treble like United did.

fuck man united and they whole fans
tell em lello said they can kiss my whole ass!


Drogba > Torres, love em both, chelsea 4 life, let the season BEGIN..... BEGIN..... BEGIN

I'm a huge Chelsea fan and I love Drogba but Torres is the better player. Let's hope this season Torres will shine and show why he is one of the best strikers in the world. On form, there's not a better striker than Torres.

You underestimate the wealth of our owners. We are a tiny investment for them, absolutely tiny. They made a 3 billion pound profit on some shares, about 3 months after they bought us. They have spent probably 1 billion quid on us so far. There's no reason for them to sell up.

Also, this owner is no abramovic. They are not just putting money in to buy players, they are developing the surrounding area too (400 million) developing the brand, the training ground, the youth team. Our club is on the way up and I don't see that stopping.

Finally, maybe players used to come to city for money but lets face it. We have the most potential of any club in the world, we are in the Champions League, we have some of the best fans. Why would anyone not want to join Man City?

[cityfan31]

Also, this owner is no abramovic. They are not just putting money in to buy players, they are developing the surrounding area too (400 million) developing the brand, the training ground, the youth team. Our club is on the way up and I don't see that stopping.

Ok turns out your the same type of person who makes blind comments. Abramovich has Already done or has looked into these things (Though admittedly he hasn't done up Fulham, But Fulham is already a done up area of London. The club obviously helps in local things such as events and charity's though which is essentially all that needs to be done in Fulham). Comment Invalid.

The Club helps in charities and events? Every club does that.

I'm talking about long-term investments that will benefit the club in the event that the owners leave. There's rumours about a ground expansion, and there's going to be huge investment in the surrounding area - the club has been redone from the ground up.

Abramovic is the kind of owner who buys players for the manager (shevschenko, torres), who falls out with the manager and sacks him, even though he is the best manager in the world (mourinho), who has gone through 7 different managers in about 5 years. He is not in it for the long haul - even the money he has put into Chelsea, a lot of it is in the form of loans against the club.

He has Chelsea as a toy, which is fine, but this is why it irritates me when our owner gets tarred with the same brush. He has never interfered in selection, transfers or anything else. He's only ever been to one game, he is a busy, serious businessman who doesn't want a reputation like Abramovic. All he does is give us ridiculous amounts of money. Chelsea will be in a mess when he goes. We won't.

[cityfan31]

The Club helps in charities and events? Every club does that.

Oh really? No shit? I mearly added this as Fulham is not really a area that needs doing up so comparing the owners like Roman does not give a shit because of that point is pointless and irrelevant.

I'm talking about long-term investments that will benefit the club in the event that the owners leave. There's rumours about a ground expansion, and there's going to be huge investment in the surrounding area - the club has been redone from the ground up.

So has Chelsea, Roman has input the money in ways that mean zero debt. He has looked at ground expansion but the facility's in and around the bridge make it tough due to regulations from the council what with safety in mind. Not sure if you been to the Bridge but the stadium empty's all onto the same road which is already packed after games, Adding more people is calling for accidents. They are debating moving away but the fans love the Bridge also, and they want to stay in the same area which means finding a reasonable plot for the stadium. The club also has been redone in many ways. Still is.

Abramovic is the kind of owner who buys players for the manager (shevschenko, torres), who falls out with the manager and sacks him, even though he is the best manager in the world (mourinho), who has gone through 7 different managers in about 5 years. He is not in it for the long haul - even the money he has put into Chelsea, a lot of it is in the form of loans against the club.

I have already stated I am dissatisfied with how managers are treated at the club so I can agree on that point, However the "loans against the club" thing is inaccurate if you look into how the club is structured.YES he can call in the "loans" but there are time periods in place he has to give notice. Including the fact it is his money in the club which he can only take back if we are turning profit otherwise he is forced to sell taking me back to the point about whoever takes us on from there. Everything money wise is and has been done for the long term future of the club and trying to balance the books. That has been the goal and continues to be the goal for the clubs long term future.

He has Chelsea as a toy, which is fine, but this is why it irritates me when our owner gets tarred with the same brush. He has never interfered in selection, transfers or anything else. He's only ever been to one game, he is a busy, serious businessman who doesn't want a reputation like Abramovic. All he does is give us ridiculous amounts of money. Chelsea will be in a mess when he goes. We won't.

I disagree with the "Chelsea will be in a mess" part, if worst comes to worst we will be sold and as far as businesses go it will be only by someone who can take us on and continue it going. I personally am not concerned by it. I don't fully agree with this "toy" thing the media and opposing fans go on about either as I think it is more a case of personality more than anything. He is a hands on person from everything I know about him. Yeah I can't always agree with his actions but he does what he thinks is the best option, All you have to do is see Roman during a match day even against lower teams in the fa cup and his reactions to know he loves the game. Most who love football love it for life, so who is to say he wont be there long term? YES there is risks but that applies for ALL clubs whoever the owner.

End note, I trust he wouldn't leave the club in that state. He is well aware of what it means to certain people. and he has been successful in business. Worst comes to worst he would sell. I get what your trying to say and imply your owners are NOT. But I think your view of Roman has been influenced in the same way your clubs reputation will go once you win a few more trophy's. These aspects of the club takeover and how the media perceives everything will be very similar. That I am sure of.

:

You made some good points. I actually don't think either Chelsea or City will be in a mess if the owners leave because that would involve selling the club to someone who by definition, would be able to afford it. I also don't think there is much danger of that happening. As long as the Glazers fuck up Man United, I'll be happy

[One Mic]

Manchester is a shithole though, if I was a footballer I'd want to play for a team in London

[TheGentlePlayer]

Fucking Barton!!
Fucking pussy-player!

[K Reidy]

Manchester City and Chelsea are both cunts

[Innovation]

Manchester City and Chelsea are both cunts

Can't wait for the Stoke game today!

[MikeNUFC]

Fucking Barton!!
Fucking pussy-player!

Yeah because Gervinho didn't dive all over the place all game, did he? And Song didn't stamp on anyone either, right?

Typical Arsenal fan - always thinks their own players are innocent.

Saying that, Barton was a twat and it was highly embarrasing for all 3 players. There was no need for JB to get involved at all and his dive was pathetic, especially considering he just berated Gervinho for diving.

It was an odd game. There was about 1 half chance the whole match. Pardew should have gone 4-5-1 from the start, that was blindingly obvious, because Arsenal ran the midfield first half. Obertan was great when he came on, definitely in line to start next week. Ameobi and Ba were feeding on scraps so can't blame them for lack of involvement. Defence was rock solid and Cabaye looked decent. Ryan Taylor wasn't that bad at left back but can't wait til Pieters comes in. Tiote had a poor game, blame it on lack of match practice, I guess.

dr3 - might as well change the title of the thread now.