Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Liverpool' started by DiogoJotaSuper, Jul 6, 2018.
I agree with this. As Z said , you read it out of context.
Who’s place are they taking like?
its fairly obvious innit.
It was a genuine question. I keep hearing this supposed inevitably being put forward, yet I’ve not heard it being challenged with that simple question. Whether that be on here or the Geordie biased Sky pundits yesterday etc. I might ask Carragher and Neville to have a go at it tonight on MNF lol.
Newcastle, Man City and Chelsea all have unlimited money and Man Utd have a lot more than everyone else so if you go by budgets, they're your four.
Other clubs could topple them, Leicester and ourselves have proved in recent years that it's not all about having a bigger budget than your opponents, but they have to get it almost perfect and have luck on their side too.
I don't go along with the inevitability of it either. With any luck, Newcastle will be relegated so we won't have to worry about it for a while.
There's a limited supply of world class players and actually atm the list isn't all that long. They're not all going to any one club. The more mega rich clubs that are created, the more the pool (and chance of success) is watered down.
I don't think Abramovich's billions are anywhere near the same level as the Saudi or Abu Dhabi investment vehicles though, they're essentially state-funded. Chelsea's is based on an individual's.
None of them have got unlimited funds though & couldn’t spend them if they did, despite how some fans choose to view it.
Newcastle are going to get investment, whether that investment brings dividends on the pitch or not, only time will tell, but the idea that they’re somehow now a shoo in for the top slots in the next few seasons is proper cart before the horse stuff. They might employ a fabulous manager who gets his signings bang on and they gain ground on the top half quickly……or they might not.
It makes absolutely no difference whatsoever though.
They have "got to" stick within the rules but the rules don't apply to all aspects of the club.
Man City don't stick to the rules, ffp as been a thing for the majority of the time they've been spending.
I’ve no idea what that first sentence means mate.
FFP was brought in primarily because of City lol, it came in 3 years after the Abu Dhabi’s arrived and they’d already thrown the kitchen sink at it, and they won the league in its first season. It’s the PL adoption of the same rules that are the biggest hurdle for any club wanting to gate crash the party now. You think the existing ‘big guns’ are going to sit silent if Newcastle attempt to ride roughshod over the PL rules, taking their slice of the CL pie in the process? I doubt it. They’ll get away with a certain amount of sponsorship inflation, but they’ll need CL revenue to truly compete.
Spitty Diouf was African Player of the Year twice, so I suppose there was some talent there. Let down by his scuzzy behaviour.
****nose what Konchesky had going for him.
Phil McNutty finally gets round to asking the question that everyone else has known the answer to for nearly 3 years.
I'd have given this a like just because you spelt shoo correctly , but I agree with the rest as well.
It seems everyone is talking about the inevitability of Newkie muscling in on the current top dogs - but said top dogs will no doubt have something to say about it, both on and off the pitch.
Well tbh it's a money league so if utd spend most, then Chelsea and City and no Newcastle it therefore stands to reason that eventually that will be the top 4.
Whenever eventually is, as it took city 5 years.
It’s not in any way comparable with City though, plus they weren’t in the bottom 3. People can’t seem to grasp that without similar revenue they won’t be able to consistently spend at the same level on wages or fees, irrespective of the Saudis, there’s a £300m bridge they need to build. If they do break the top 4 then things change, but it’s not simply a given.
Are the wage increase rules still in effect?
Those short term cost control rules and such?
The issue is their current piddly little revenues mean the Saudis can pump in advertising of all sorts and artificially inflate those to enable massive wages hikes no?
Yes they have to inject the revenue but city did that with stadium naming and sponsorships etc?
The revenue must come in the same year as the spend however they acheive that. There's plenty of Saudi companies to funnel 500mil through
They clearly need about 20 players
Yes they can invest that way, but there’s only so much you’ll get away with and it won’t be £500m a year, As they use market value. Clubs have cried about our £12m a year for the training ground sponsorship ffs.