And you're right about the gulf in resources for Barca and Real. The same applies to City and Chelsea - of which City won league last season, and Chelsea likely to win this. So there isn't a difference.
If we have the same points as City or Southampton they are going to beat us to it because of their better goal differences. We have to finish about these two to stand any chance.
Tobes I don't really agree cod city will be in transition And Utd will spend a freaking shead load Only Utd and Chelsea will realistically compete for the title Arsenal are close but they have to get their team finished and not injure everyone. I think they will be comfortable Lfc are well off competing, Spurs are nowhere near close and Southampton with respect to them are solid but uninspired
Why not? in theory we are too. I really think at the beginning of each season, we can't say " LFC have NO chance of winning the title" we may say that they are 4th or 5th favourites but like the previous season showed we were close to winning it and none of the big clubs can be considered as having NO chance like in the SPL or in Spain (where there are 3 top clubs with a chance).
Well I suspect both United and Arsenal will win it in coming years and the fact city could well drop out of the top 4 just shows how competitive it is. So thats 4 realistic winners. Even Liverpool, given the right circumstances could do it (probably not but in theory *not one of those sisu ffs*). La liga has 2 likely winners and one who might but probably wont more often than not. Chelsea also haven't won the title since 2010. So its hardly common place for them. The fact is. The Premier league is more competitive. From top to bottom.
Next season of course they are? In case you've not noticed City are now 4th and the closest challengers to Chelsea are Arsenal. Both they and United will strengthen again in the summer and they'll both be capable of a title challenge next season. City are in total turmoil and FFP will restrict their ability to rebuild as they would wish to. They'll have to offload players and that'll be a challenge for them, especially in terms of generating some decent fees.
FFP "Financial play may play" a crucial part if City are unable to buy big players next season. Clubs are being monitored.
There's a massive difference, as the playing field has been made more even by FFP (both UEFA's and the PL's) and in England the massive TV revenues are shared equally across the league, with only the league placing element being the difference between City's revenue and Burnley's. Both City and Chelsea can no longer spend in the way that they have done in the past. Chelsea spent £118m last year, but only £5m net, as they balanced the books.
City wont be able to spend big at all unless they sell players. Chelsea, United and Arsenal will be absolutely fine. Not sure what the situation is with you guys, I remember hearing you were in a precarious position last year in terms of FFP but that it has now sorted itself.....not sure.
At Madrid are not any more unlikely to win the league than say Arsenal, United. And Sevilla are a strong team now and are a point off At Madrid as well. PL is more competitive and I agree with that, but La Liga is pretty competitive also.
City's "business" model was always going to be tricky to maintain them at the top. They needed to buy big players and that has helped them compete against Chelsea and United and win the title. But to be sustainable they either needed a stream of quality youngsters coming through or buying top talent to replace the ageing stars. With FFP, they really desperately needed their current stars to keep going, to be motivated and to keep their challenge and their standards. To see these highly paid players who have won the premiership only last year lose their motivation is nothing short of a disgrace. The academy looks fantastic but it is more of long term project. Realistiaclly they can't expect anyone coming from there for years. The FFP is really affecting them as they cannot just go and spend £200m on 3 or 4 top players which they currently need.
That's your subjective opinion, and it might be right. However, that's not the point of the debate, the discussion was about who is CAPABLE of winning the league in this country and come August there'll be pundits, fans and media making a case for 5 or 6 sides that they think will be in with a shout. That's the difference between our league now and the likes of Spain. The benefactor model allowed 2 clubs to rise to the pinnacle in a non-organic manner and gate crash the party,and whilst we might all have different views on whether what they did was right, only a fool would argue that it hasn't resulted in a more competitive league.
City will be powerhouse over the next decade (providing they can stay in top 4). They have invested heavily in the infrastructure of the club from the academy, to the commercial deals. Besides the insane spending on the actual players, they're investing well into the club and doing the right things.
They will stay in the top 4 no problem. But their domination of the premiership as predicted by some when they won their first title is unlikely to happen because their expenditure will be restrcited by FFP. Their recruitment of new players has been almost as bad as ours. How did Mangala and Jovetic justify those prices? To sell them and replace them with better players will cost quite a lot. City used to be in the market for the top available players but now they aren't without breaking FFP rules. I am not saying they won't win the title over the next ten years. But they won't dominate. In fact I cannot see ANY team dominating (Thats definitely gone forever with Ferguson retiring). It will be like in most leagues cyclical. Except for the Bundesliga where Bayern is set to be there for the next decade or so.
City have said their aim is to break even or make a small profit this year. The days of their insane spending on players are over. They're now a club that are being forced by the rules into being a sustainable business. Yes, they've invested heavily in infrastructure and notably their academy system, but that is not likely to bear any fruit for a few years yet. So they're going to have to trade out of their current situation and that's going to be far from easy. They won't be the dominant force in England over the next decade, they'll be in the leading pack, but they'll not be the stand out side.
They need to be managed well. They have a fair few aging stars, IMO they need to cash in on them and buy in some fresh younger blood. If they wait too long then those stars won't be worth anything and they'll have to start again. If they're sticking to FFP then restarting again won't be easy. Toure and Kompany are perfect examples; two valuable assets in decline. Cash in now to maximise the asset.
That side has the same key elements of the side that won them the league in '12. It's stale and ageing. Toure hasn't got a resale value imo, due to his age and his hideous contract. He'll be 32 by the season's end and he's on £210k per week ffs! Kompany is just about to turn 30 and looks like a player who isn't going to age well, I doubt they'll get a fortune for him either. The players they need to cash in on are the likes of Jovetic and Dzeko.
