Was disgusting and no way I'll defend them but again, Chelsea fans boo every opportunity during respectful moments such as remembering Hillsborough or Munich.
Think we have gone through this before They have done nothing imho that other clubs have not done Us included We paid higher wages back in the 80s as far as I can see Yes they volume of cash is different but the principle Is still the same imho Utd got their money from the timing of having success and sky coming in As Klopp and others have proved having money doesn’t mean you win it’s just easier and yes City have took it to new heights - a similar way to AC Milan In The 80s imho where they were buying players just so other teams couldn’t have them. But that is the players fault for going imho. That said it was the pogba transfer that sent everything batshit crazy but you can argue that stems from the Trevor Francis transfer. So I am totally at ease with it I agree it doesn’t sit right - all the money in the game is obscene when there is so much **** in the world but yet no matter how much I can see it and think it - I will still watch it which I believe makes me some kind of hypocrite
I think they are great reasons but thinking that only City fans / players do this I think is misguided - they just got caught We have dickheads too and let’s be honest anyone doing that kind of **** is simply not a football or sports fan they are a ****wit - end of Football should be about the good healthy sporting ethos with a bit of Bantz thrown in - however I get the sentiment.
Difference is clubs like Liverpool, Man Utd, Milan, etc built up over many years to be in those financially powerful positions and therefore it's "creditable". The likes of Chelsea, Man City and PSG have just won ther lottery. Edit; never been as bothered as most about where the money came from though tbh
I know - like I say think we have gone over this before but for me the speed they have acquired their money just doesn’t bother me I wish they would admit what they do Like when pep makes a dig about not spending 75 mill which one we have got close to twice When he has spent 50-60 on many players But it doesn’t get me mad like someone getting a red for a keeper being a knob and putting his head down in the way
You can have all the money in the world mate but if you throw it at the wrong managers/players it means nothing. Give them some credit for mostly getting things right.
I edited. It's never really bothered me too much, just prefer to see clubs fo it properly. I'd hate us to have a sugar daddy though
You're right, we have been through it before and I've no desire to do it again. I was merely explaining to someone who perhaps wasn't a witness to the original discussion just why I felt that way - that I have nothing against City (or Chelsea) apart from the way their success has been achieved, which I see as distinctly different to both Utd and us. We'll just have to accept that we disagree on this one.
Managers deserve credit if they win things but more so if they've had to build with limitations. Having endless pots of cash like Pep and Jose have had at various jobs does dampen their achievements though
So you don't think that having virtually unlimited wealth allows a club to put in place all the facilities and the decision-makers who can make it happen? It's about much more than the players.
I agree totally but I wouldn’t stop watching them if we got one cause it’s the club I live not the owner Chavs get a lot thrown at them about Romans money but I think they have ran themselves very well and using a very different model to most they stockpile players to sell and make money and they go through managers at an unbelievable rate but it seems to work for them It’s like they use the new manager bounce to win trophies lol They have also been at this a while and at some point they become a successful club - surely anyway I am shattered Long weekend Gigs Football teams managed - 4 now ! Two courses and an assessment and work I am shattered lol But happy to be working again so happy days
Have been reading a similar thread on the Spuds board, not commented yet because they are a bit precious. My thoughts on owners (regardless of how they made their money, nobody gets that rich from being nice). Your lot, bought the club in a fire sale with the proviso that they built a new stadium. Reality, they have built a new stand by loaning the money to the club and are taking it back in re-payments. Nothing actually put into the club just used as an asset to gain money. Our lot, bought the club as a leveraged buy and put the club in £500k of debt (never in debt before), have taken well over £1bl out of the club and haven't even given the ground a lick of paint in 15 years+, Always seem to leave enough in for big transfers and wages though. Chelsea, owner has pumped well over a billion into the club as loans and taken nothing out, has periodically wiped the loans off the books. Man seems to care about the club be it as a vanity project or a real supporter. City, owners have pumped billions into the club and surrounding area, great for both beneficiaries. This is obviously an attempt to clean their image up to the world but is doing a great deal of good for thousands of local people and the area. Spuds, spent a billion on a ground (very nice) that is at least aimed 50% at the NFL and seem to have put the cost of this on Spurs? Also spent a **** lot of money on hotels and flats around the area, who do they belong to? The ground is great but in the great scheme of things worth **** all apart from the land it stands on, who would buy a football ground and for what use? There is a reason City and WestHam rent theirs
Ignoring Spurs (because they don't fit the discussion anyway)... You've got two clubs that have been built up on decades of success that are now being squeezed of money by their owners. Imagine what they could do if they weren't being bled dry Vs Two clubs that weren't overly successful until a sugar daddy turned up giving them more money than they could dream of generating. Imagine where they'd be without said cash. I think that is where people are coming from when complaining about "money clubs"
I was more concentrating on which owners are actually doing something for their clubs as opposed to those who see them as a cash cow but can't fault your point.
It's not even that. It's not even money clubs as to another fan all of the top 6 or 8 or whoever are all the same. (Whether its utd or arsenal dominating or now Chelsea and city) It's about the fact that two states (never ever believe Abramovich is not working on behalf of Putin either nobody lasts long in Russia without being so ) are artificially pumping in any number that's needed no matter that their own people might benefit from it. If man utd dominate via better revenues and a bigger stadium and are plain better run I could accept that. Its transparent why. City will spend 500mil again from nowhere, call it sponsorship. As people say, that facility they've built is not founded on reality. Its image and unlimited funds to play the game
