Obviously we've got our own billionaire owner but there seems to be an air about the way ****ty conduct their deals that really pisses me off. At least we seem to have pretty much always had a decent wage structure in place (regardless of the transfer fees) but they basically use a "name your wage" approach. Sour grapes it may be but it doesn't mean it's right does it ? It's hard to explain what I mean and why it's different to what we as a club have done over the last 10 years I just get the impression they do it the same way a WAG decides what new handbag she wants "What's your most expensive and bestestest handbag?? And it's got to be the one everyone else wants!" "This one here..." "OK, I'll take it... here's a blank cheque, I'll let you fill it out" Why else would someone like Eden Hazard ignore the overtures of the likes of Barcelona, Real Madrid, AC Milan, Inter Milan to go to miserable old Manchester if it's not for the dosh? The scouts must have a bloody easy job, they've probably got a 10 year old checking player stats on Football Manager and doing this all day: please log in to view this image
Shevchenko and Torres I assume... Pretty narrow minded don't you think considering the amount of players in total that have arrived under Abramovich
We have bought players, and spent a ridiculous amount of money, to achieve what we have, but haven't smashed wage structures to do it. The difficult thing with City is that they out pay every club in a very unsustainable way. We would lose out on signings to Liverpool, Utd and Arsenal due to their heritage, whereas City lose out to no-one as they pay stupid money to get the player to sign a contract. Ultimately everyone who has won the premier league has had to buy it it, at least initially, and none more so than Fergie. It will be interesting to see how £1b in 4 years and counting stacks up...yes they have a good grass roots structure in place going forward, but so what...they would have sacked Mancini if he didn't come close this season, and on that basis they are no different to any other club. Real sack managers who win everything...are they wrong? They certainly aren't right, but who can argue, the club goes on....
Lucky, in Oz there's a wage cap structure on Aussie Rules, Rugby League and Football. All it does is prove conclusively that you cannot legislate to make everyone equal. Nothing has changed at all regarding relative strength of Clubs. In football it means players and coaches changing clubs as they do their socks,and so teams find it impossible to build over a period of time. The 2 players they bring in this year to compliment the midfielder, are flailing around next year because the midfielder is gone !!!!!! It will be no different if they bring it into Football in Europe. The Market rules, always has, always will.
They are spending what they've got ... like you did/do. Chelsea have waved around wads in recent years Torres and a £40m bid for Modric...as for wage structure...you didn't used to be the biggest payers and then were so you must of upped it considerably. So yes it is hypocritical to complain...as they are doing what others have done but on a much quicker scale. None of this is a dig at chelsea...if you have the money then you can spend it...but it is killing the game imo
Do you honestly believe that? We have paid up to £150k a week to time served players who have made a huge contribution to our recent success, and a couple of "marquee" signings in Torres and Shevchenko... City apparently went to £250k for three players before they won anything...
Appreciate what you're saying My view is that we have offered big money to buy the player, but never gone stupid on wages as CP has pointed out previously, and tried to sell the club in as the factor as to why they should sign...
I have no problem with wages being chucked about. Most players are motivated by money now, it's understandable. What I have an issue with are the signings that are bloody stupid and short sighted, like a certain blonde hairdresser we have on the bench. Don't get me wrong, love him as a player and you can tell his hearts in the right place, but we were never suited for him, infact, he was probably the most polar opposite striker in the league to our team, and we just signed him. I know he's meant to be the symbol in a change in style of play, but that hasn't happened. Now, had we had spent £10mil on Cisse, or Ba, or a Hermandez-esq striker to play off Drogs then who knows where we'd be? We all know our position in the table is down to a shocking lack of ability to finish of teams with a clinical striker. Edit- cant deny I do love Torres in the team though...
Without a big wage carrot who realistically wouldve come to city when we were a mid table club at best? I've no doubt the majority of the big names had no idea who we were,it was different for Chelsea as they were already one of the top English sides so could attract the players without the incentive Our owners appear far more rational than roman and don't interfere in the running of the club unless someone is out of line,Tevez and Gary Cooke for instance,so mancini was always likely to be given the time and space to create his squad. Also the FFP has accelerated the need to get a squad together before the regulations kick in and we now only need to tinker after getting shut of the deadwood Probably not good for the game,but if not us it was always likely to be someone else and having suffered for years watching utter ****e,a period of watching city be competitive is hugely enjoyable if only to watch the bitter face of ferguson as his empire crumbles
I couldn't really give a crap. Anything that breaks up the Arsenal/United domination of English football is good for the game IMO. People should realise the amount of money Jose wasted before we criticise City. Kezman Tiago Morais Jarosik Diarra Del Horno Wright-Phillips Boularhous To name but a few.
