Buying success

I agree they should be a threat, but to many draws have cost UTD.
Maybe next years is our year

 

It'll have to be. If it's not, Jose will blow a fuse and leave.

 

We had really **** owners during that time, and also towards the end Benitez actually lost the plot... for example - wanting to sell Alonso to buy Gareth Barry

Klopp hasn't had enough support tbh, unless he doesn't want to buy big?

As it stands under Klopp we've made a profit on our overall transfer business. That tbh is odd considering the stature of our club. The expansion of Anfield obviously making an impact on our finances... but still, we need players as our squad depth is poor.

I don't think it's as straight forward as saying our scouts are the problem.

 

Neither were Chelsea. They spent hundreds of millions but it was United who won three league titles on the bounce as well as a European Cup on a Glazer budget.

Given how much Chelsea have spent under Abramovich they should have won a lot more than they have.

 

I can agree with that.
4 league titles
4 FA Cups
3 League Cups
1 Europa League
1 Champions League

in 12 years, is pretty impressive, but given the edge we had over literally everyone else, you could argue that we should have won more league titles.
No accounting for SAF's genius though. Thats really all that stopped us in the early years of Roman from total dominance.

I dont think Roman's manager merry go round helped matters though.
If they'd stuck with Mourinho the first time around instead of sacking him, I think the haul would have been better, think we probably would have gotten at least one more PL and one more CL.

 

Which goes to show that money alone doesn't buy success. A good manager and a club being run properly also helps.

 

Yup.

So now that Deidre's OP has been discredited, shall we all move on to discussing Brexit?

 

I think Brexit has been thoroughly discussed Stan.

 

Indeed.
Money is no guarantee of anything.
It sure as **** helps, but it needs to be spent wisely.
And the personnel bought in need to be utilised correctly.

 

Everyone's bought the league since the 80's. Utd bought the league with money they didn't have, whoring themselves to anyone who had any money, remember Micheal Knighton and his keepy-uppies at Old trafford to thousands of screaming fans? Then they had Magnier bankrolling them for a bit.

 

We didn't win the league around the Knighton debacle and Magnier never bankrolled United. Other than that you're spot on.

 

Arsenal are more conservative . Arsenal carry the most debt I think from building their new stadium .They pay ( I think ) 36 million to service that debt , but the extra seats bring in 56 million extra . A pretty solid debt to carry and once that debt is payed off ( in about 10 years I think ) all that 56 million will be theirs instead of the 20 million they make after servicing that debt . Man U make their money on marketing , Chelsea and Man City make their money from " Sugardaddies " , Arsenal make their money from wisdom IMO

 

Wrong.
They got to the top with a financial doping, that much is undeniable.
But you had better check their turnovers in the last few years mate.
Chelsea haven't been bankrolled by Roman for about 5 years.

 

Can you please forward these wise work to Mr Ellis Short.

Co. Stadium of Light. Sunderland.

Thanks