In the same way I'd like to see Man U, Chelsea, Arsenal and Liverpool to lose every game. Backhanded compliment.
Like I say, I don't want to take this thread off topic, but if you want to see the gist of my thoughts, you can read this thread.
God, you can hardly compare us to Man City! We've spend £10, half of which was on one player! Take away Mills, and we spent £5! Which is less that we paid of Akinbiyi years ago! Laughable comparison.
This is unprecedented spending for the second division. Perspective is required to understand the comparison. Anyway, I'll leave you to discuss the Burnley game.
It's all relative. There is an upper limit of where spending more money won't increase your chances of getting a player because of the league limitation. You're still trying to buy the league, the point LS18 was making.
If you had the funds we have, you've have done the same if not more. And I don't remember Leeds being shy of spending money in the Prem when we had a team assembled on a shoestring. A real case of double standards.
We weren't rubbing your noses in it though, mostly because at the time we'd never heard of Leicester.
Leeds blew alot of money on crap and i remember when the brought Rio Ferdinand for 18M from West Ham. His debut was at Filbert Street and we hammered them 3-1
And you have every right to call us ****ers for that. It was a crude attempt to buy success and it deserved to fail.
ye, which is what should happen when you spend above your means. And by means I mean what you can bring in without having a massive cushion of a billionaire who thinks a football team is a plaything.
You remember us. Pretty sure we beat you on en route to one of one three cup finals. Can't remember you getting to any cup finals post-'96 though....
...but we're not spending above our means. £10m is very manageable. Get back to me when we spend £18m on one player though, won't you? Then you might have a point.
