I don’t think we can keep attributing City’s success to simply spent money. The fact is that many teams have spent even more money with nothing to show for it.
https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/pre...8/saison_id_bis/2023/nat/0/pos//w_s//intern/0
The difference with City is they have Pep to get the most out of their investments while having a top down structure in place to sustain the objectives of the club. Of course, those fkers have doped the financial system, but we have to acknowledge that money is not the sole ingredient of their success. Ironically, the way we have gone about running the club proves that case.
On the last point, I disagree with simply giving money to ETH as the answer. We need to first institute a transfer system that is independent of a manager and Ineos knows this too with their moves so far. From ETH’s record, he has had far more success with players he didn’t spend money to bring in. This suggests he’s very resourceful with using grassroots talents that have come through the system. Such players seem to have the hunger and appear to better understand the demands of club than those we have spent millions to bring in and or those placed on huge unjust wages like Rashford, again, because of lack of structure.
There are few exceptions such as Martinez, Amad, Fernandez, etc. that have been outstanding buys and on what can be deemed regular wages. This suggests that a systemic approach to choosing players is far more important than simply giving money to ETH to spend. Hojlund is another solid player I believe will come good. But we paid far too much to get him here. Again, a sign of the club’s wastefulness.
So for me, the biggest opportunity for the club is addressing the lack of structure that has plagued us since Sir Alex left. Get that fixed, then ETH, or any other manager, can focus on getting the most out of the squad.