Re: The Football Chat Thread : Mon Aug 29, 2011 3:22 pm  

Cibaman wrote:

I'd be more than happy to go back to the days when a team like Forest could come from nowhere to win the League and European Cup. But that era died with the advent of the CL and the huge riches it bestowed on the established "Top 4". I'm just grateful that we got the money rather than, say, Everton.

Ah, so you wouldn't agree with Kenwright when he said that every club wants to be an Everton?

Fook what everyone else says mate, enjoy what you've got. So what if you invest a lot of money into your team so does a lot of other clubs and they always have. United have spent big money this summer as have Chelsea and Liverpool. I wasn't a big fan of Mancini when he first arrived but he's doing a great job, he's trying to ship out the over paid rubbish previous managers brought in and replace them with genuine quality. I just wish someone would come to Goodison and give Moyes money to spend.

Dita's Slot Meter wrote:

Rubbish.....I've been a big critic of City's transfer policy, but for me, yesterday's win at Tottenham was probably more impressive than United's.

I'll probably never warm to the City/Chelsea style of buying titles, but if they produce football like yesterday's, then it will make it easier to stomach come the time they eventually win the league.

Every team spends money on players though United and Liverpool have spent big this year, in fact Sky put up a caption before yesterday's La Liga matches and Liverpool were 5th highest on net spend in Europe this summer, Chelsea have gone and spent big again this summer too. You need to spend big at some point to bring quality players in. I don't agree they're buying titles, yes they're spending big money but they have to bring in the right players and make them play, I don't agree it's as easy as it sounds.

I thought both City and United were extremely impressive and I wouldn't rate one better than the other, I take the point that City played a more first choice team than United did but some of those goals were just pure class. No matter who Arsenal had playing Young's goals and Rooney's free kicks were brilliant as was Anderson's ball over to Welbeck to start the scoring off.

Re: The Football Chat Thread : Mon Aug 29, 2011 4:34 pm  

Roofs wrote:

For me, clubs that can be proud and have a feeling of achievement are those like Liverpool and Man United, not Chelsea or Man City.

That is possibly one of the worst opinions ever on RL Fans. How much money have Liverpool and Man U spent respectively?

Are you suggesting that they would be as successful without having any money to spend?

What a clown!

Re: The Football Chat Thread : Mon Aug 29, 2011 5:33 pm  

I do find it funny when people think Uniteds team is built on a shoestring. Ferdinand, Rooney, Bernatov were all about £30mil weren't they? De gea, Valencia, nani, young, jones, Anderson were all just £15-20mil.

Re: The Football Chat Thread : Mon Aug 29, 2011 5:40 pm  

inside_man wrote:

I do find it funny when people think Uniteds team is built on a shoestring. Ferdinand, Rooney, Bernatov were all about £30mil weren't they? De gea, Valencia, nani, young, jones, Anderson were all just £15-20mil.

Exactly mate, well said. You only have to look at this summer and see Chelsea, City, United and Liverpool have all spent big money, I have to laugh when people constantly say Chelsea and City are buying there way to trophies as if United never spend a penny. They've spent massively on De Gea, Jones and Young this summer alone, it isn't just City that spend it's everyone.

Re: The Football Chat Thread : Mon Aug 29, 2011 5:40 pm  

inside_man wrote:

I do find it funny when people think Uniteds team is built on a shoestring. Ferdinand, Rooney, Bernatov were all about £30mil weren't they? De gea, Valencia, nani, young, jones, Anderson were all just £15-20mil.

I know, it's utter cringe. It's the sheer definition of Irony.

Re: The Football Chat Thread : Mon Aug 29, 2011 5:43 pm  

inside_man wrote:

I do find it funny when people think Uniteds team is built on a shoestring. Ferdinand, Rooney, Bernatov were all about £30mil weren't they? De gea, Valencia, nani, young, jones, Anderson were all just £15-20mil.

As i pointed out about 3 or 4 pages back, there is a difference between spending money that a club has earned, by either selling other players or general income (Man Utd, Liverpool, Arsenal et all), and spending money that has literally been handed to you on a plate by Russian or Middle-Eastern owners (Chelsea/City), hence buying the title. I do acknowledge however that it takes the right manager and coaches to push those expensive buys to winning trophies.

Re: The Football Chat Thread : Mon Aug 29, 2011 5:45 pm  

Dan_FC wrote:

Exactly mate, well said. You only have to look at this summer and see Chelsea, City, United and Liverpool have all spent big money, I have to laugh when people constantly say Chelsea and City are buying there way to trophies as if United never spend a penny. They've spent massively on De Gea, Jones and Young this summer alone, it isn't just City that spend it's everyone.

Normally you seem quite intelligent but i'm not sure YOU understand either

Re: The Football Chat Thread : Mon Aug 29, 2011 5:46 pm  

inside_man wrote:

I do find it funny when people think Uniteds team is built on a shoestring. Ferdinand, Rooney, Bernatov were all about £30mil weren't they? De gea, Valencia, nani, young, jones, Anderson were all just £15-20mil.

To be fair, United have a HISTORY of being a big club, thus, it is accepted when they spend big cash.

Chelsea and City are seen as tacky and just being flash, in a loadsamoney type of way.... Sort of like when that chav fella, Michael Carroll (??) won the lottery and behaved like a real bonehead....

Re: The Football Chat Thread : Mon Aug 29, 2011 5:50 pm  

Dita's Slot Meter wrote:

To be fair, United have a HISTORY of being a big club, thus, it is accepted when they spend big cash.

That implies that it's ok for them to spend big and no one else, bit strange isn't it?

Re: The Football Chat Thread : Mon Aug 29, 2011 6:08 pm  

Ajw71 wrote:

That implies that it's ok for them to spend big and no one else, bit strange isn't it?

I'm not saying its any more ok, just more accepted, because of their successful history and size is seen as giving them an entitlement to spend big.

City and Chelsea ( the obvious examples) are just seen as flash foreign-owned clubs, playing real-life fantasy football.