If a Player was faced with a choice of Liverpool FC or Mad Citeh, on the same wages, I believe most would choose Citeh. They offer a greater Sporting Opportunity, Champions League of course, but not just that, they will be perceived as more ambitious and more likely to win things. Sorry Lads, but that is just the way of the modern Player. The fact is LFC are going to find it very hard indeed, and incredibly expensive, to get back into the big time. History, is just that. You can't look back on your career and with a tear in your eye, and chest pumped with pride, on the Trophies that were in the Cabinet before you got there
I still think a large number would choose Liverpool over City. Most players are smart enough to see Man City are a joke of a club. Just look at them.
I think most would choose Liverpool. Even outside of England Liverpool are still considered a big club ( and rightly so )
UIR. Excellent comment. Man United were still able to attract players when they were relegated in 1974,because they were still Manchester United.The name meant something,thats where the prestige kicks in.Liverpool are exactly the same,and its up to Kenny to drill that into potential signings.He believes he can atract players,he also knows he can make players believe in the project that he's putting together,thats the sort of person he is.
Surely there are no joke teams in the Champions League. Surely United don't lose to joke teams. United spent their cash over 20 years they spent in 2 years same results, not exaclty of course but you get my point, whats the difference really, time? Same with Chelsea, Madrid on the other hand, now there's a club that should have imploded more than once, I would class them, ethically as a joke not City, football is business and developement is part of business whether us fans like it or not
BBF. Thats where the ''Competition'' kicks in. I don't think Man United fans like it when other clubs spend money.I've no problem with City spending money....However I will be more worried when they appoint someone that will spend it wisely. They are afraid that if Kenny gets it right with his signings then its curtains for them.They loved it when Liverpool weren't competitve.However they are now going to have to get used to Liverpool being competitive.
Doesn't this apply to EVERY club? Everything United, Arsenal, City... whoever have won is technically 'history' now.
Is it really fair to keep having a go at City? So they have plenty of money but some of that effect will be diminished by the new UEFA rules. They have chosen a particular strategy to try and achieve success. It is perfectly fair even if you and I don't particularly like it. Chelsea did exactly the same and have been proved succesful. However, it is a high risk strategy. If you want to draw comparisons for City then you should really be comparing them with the Real Madrid of not too many years ago. Real were bankrupt (they even had to sell their training ground to pay their day to day running costs (let alone reduce their debts). Yet, year after year the led the buying spree for marquee players. In such a comparison City look snow white. Coming closer to home then you can question the level of debt that surrounds English clubs. At least City's owner stands to take all of the loss if their strategy fails. One of the points missed above in the debate about joining City, united or Liverpool is reputation. Any player considering joining Liverpool or United are only too well aware of the massive global reputation of these 2 clubs - City, Chelsea and Arsenal are not even in that ball park.
This is right i think. The difference between us and Spurs for example, being that we can handle a CL 'drought' for longer than they can. In fact I'd go so far as to say they have effectively zero European reputation. It's like Dortmund being in Europe next year, if they drop out next season their reputation will fall again significantly, lower than if Bayern had no CL football for 2 or maybe 3 years more than them. I'd estimate we would lose our reputation with probably another 3 (maybe 2) years of no CL i think, but in the mean time i think we still have a lot of residual reputation. We still have a huge fanbase and large revenue streams and as long as CL football isn't central to us competing in the transfer market financially, i think we're not immediately out of the picture for all top players.
earned our money through clever business and on field success. Man City literally think they can just buy it. It wont happen. Especially considering the FFP rules which will make a mockery of that awful club. Players are taking the piss out of them already.
It is very important for our global brand and to attract/keep players- we're lucky, althought we'v earnt it, we can attract due to what we have done in our recent past. The quicker we get back the better. The bosses know this, and thats why we're investing.
I admit that I don't particularly enjoy what City are doing, but unfortunately money does (eventually, in the right hands) buy success. Gretna did it, and Hoffenheim have sort of done it. Of course, more locally and to a lesser extent (they were in the top flight already), Chelsea have done it. It'll certainly be interesting to see who thrives in the fair play market.
