Transfer Rumours Transfer Rumours thread
- Thread starter Bozz
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
I going to be honest - the money has generally not bothered me - I have always been of the opinion that if you have the money it’s fair game but I think the sport really needs to take a deep hard look at itself
I mean some real hard changes
I think the game needs to implode financially
These clubs have learnt nothing in the past 18 months
Really is shocking, not surprising but shocking
I might have to try ignoring it as I am in danger of loathing myself over loving the sport
Think I should stick with the kids teams lol
Maybe but we only had Henderson and the samba boys in late action and the last time in 2018 they picked right up and went and got 98 points or something plus cl.
Imo it could happen to some of the mid table sides like man utd
- May 22, 2011
- 73,301
- 25,365
- 113
quotes from pep… Maybe can’t afford 100m on a striker but on a midfielder it’s fine. Def seems like city are struggling financially 
Listen, with these prices we are not going to sign any striker,” said Guardiola. “It’s impossible – we cannot afford it.
“All the clubs struggle financially and we are not an exception. Maybe we are going to buy one but today there is more chance we are not going to buy any striker.
“I understand completely the situation of the club. We are not going to do any specific or special thing that the club cannot do.
“The most important thing is the club has to be sustainable for the next five or 10 years. We never spend, on one player, big, big figures.
Listen, with these prices we are not going to sign any striker,” said Guardiola. “It’s impossible – we cannot afford it.
“All the clubs struggle financially and we are not an exception. Maybe we are going to buy one but today there is more chance we are not going to buy any striker.
“I understand completely the situation of the club. We are not going to do any specific or special thing that the club cannot do.
“The most important thing is the club has to be sustainable for the next five or 10 years. We never spend, on one player, big, big figures.
And he's right, it looks like they have ****ed Kane off because of the price quoted (so striker part quote sorted), they are said to have offered £100m for Grealish though so we will see how that goes.quotes from pep… Maybe can’t afford 100m on a striker but on a midfielder it’s fine. Def seems like city are struggling financially
Listen, with these prices we are not going to sign any striker,” said Guardiola. “It’s impossible – we cannot afford it.
“All the clubs struggle financially and we are not an exception. Maybe we are going to buy one but today there is more chance we are not going to buy any striker.
“I understand completely the situation of the club. We are not going to do any specific or special thing that the club cannot do.
“The most important thing is the club has to be sustainable for the next five or 10 years. We never spend, on one player, big, big figures.
When he stated they never spend big big money on any one player he is also right, Liverpool have spent much bigger on single players than City have so far.
- May 22, 2011
- 73,301
- 25,365
- 113
Like I said, he can’t afford 100m for a striker but fine for a midfielder.
I feel like spending £100m on one player is spending big big money on one player but maybe I’m wrong
Not sure why you’re talking about Liverpool. This is a post about city, has nothing to do with lfc
Seems to be a post criticising City for offering big money for a much sort after player when your club have already outspent them on more than one occasion for single players.Like I said, he can’t afford 100m for a striker but fine for a midfielder.
I feel like spending £100m on one player is spending big big money on one player but maybe I’m wrong
Not sure why you’re talking about Liverpool. This is a post about city, has nothing to do with lfc
Hardly a fair criticism (or whine) considering your own club led the way in this.
- May 22, 2011
- 73,301
- 25,365
- 113
Also liverpool record signing is vvd for 75m.
city is Dias for 68m.
Would hardly call it a huge difference
Oh then you add rodri, mahrez, cancello for 60m plus, Laporte kdb for 55m plus. Don’t pretend that city aren’t spending big money on players. Just because arsenal Liverpool united and chelsea have paid more for 1 player means nothing. Don’t think there is any other club that has spent more than 50m on players more times than city
city is Dias for 68m.
Would hardly call it a huge difference
Oh then you add rodri, mahrez, cancello for 60m plus, Laporte kdb for 55m plus. Don’t pretend that city aren’t spending big money on players. Just because arsenal Liverpool united and chelsea have paid more for 1 player means nothing. Don’t think there is any other club that has spent more than 50m on players more times than city
- May 22, 2011
- 73,301
- 25,365
- 113
Outspent them on more than one occasion? Other than vvd we haven’t outspent them on a single player.
Also, you seem to forget that pogba joined united for 90m in 2016, 2 years before we spent 75m on vvd. Have a look closer to home if you want to throw that one out there…
So basically you are agreeing with Pep even after laughing at him. City have never spent big big money on a single player before?Also liverpool record signing is vvd for 75m.
city is Dias for 68m.
Would hardly call it a huge difference
Oh then you add rodri, mahrez, cancello for 60m plus, Laporte kdb for 55m plus. Don’t pretend that city aren’t spending big money on players. Just because arsenal Liverpool united and chelsea have paid more for 1 player means nothing. Don’t think there is any other club that has spent more than 50m on players more times than city
So basically you are agreeing with Pep even after laughing at him. City have never spent big big money on a single player before?Also liverpool record signing is vvd for 75m.
city is Dias for 68m.
Would hardly call it a huge difference
Oh then you add rodri, mahrez, cancello for 60m plus, Laporte kdb for 55m plus. Don’t pretend that city aren’t spending big money on players. Just because arsenal Liverpool united and chelsea have paid more for 1 player means nothing. Don’t think there is any other club that has spent more than 50m on players more times than city
It's not me criticising other teams for paying high fees mate, we ahve done it many times (Maguire for £80m when you got VvD for £75m is a joke but then again we just got Varane a lot cheaper).
Why have a go at Pep for saying they haven't spent big on a single player when it's true? many teams including your own have spent more (or maybe you are only taking into account "net spend"
)
- May 22, 2011
- 73,301
- 25,365
- 113
So basically you are agreeing with Pep even after laughing at him. City have never spent big big money on a single player before?
It's not me criticising other teams for paying high fees mate, we ahve done it many times (Maguire for £80m when you got VvD for £75m is a joke but then again we just got Varane a lot cheaper).
Why have a go at Pep for saying they haven't spent big on a single player when it's true? many teams including your own have spent more (or maybe you are only taking into account "net spend"
So 68m on a player isn’t big money? What’s the definition of big? Only £69m and above?
- May 22, 2011
- 73,301
- 25,365
- 113
Last edited:
You must be truly desperate to come out with stuff like this.
I still can't quite see if deigo was saying city didn't spend big.money or was asking something or making some point about they fact they have in the past.
Anyway total shambles.
You can say just about anything if you strip context away.
Anyway total shambles.
You can say just about anything if you strip context away.