All New Summer 2008 Transfer Merry Go Round/Rumour Mill

gjc10212 said:
I don't think the FA should allow this type of buy out to go ahead as it's clearly not fair, and as a business City will be a monopoly surely!? Scenario - Chelsea, Man Utd, Ars. & Liv. bid for player - City then steamroller and buy all..what is the max squad size a team is allowed? Spending will no doubt exceed the total profit made by the club just to save face (did you hear the arab owner talk about steamrolling to get to the top...).

I expect there will now be a super league setup for the ultra rich clubs.....??
Click to expand...

Fair? What has that got to do with the price of cheese?

City can't be a monopoly when it comes to a football league unless they buy up all the other teams in the league, they may have a de facto monopoly on being able to buy the most expensive players/pay the highest wages but that assumes that a) the selling club will sell to City and b) the player is only motivated by wages.

You'd also appear to be assuming that if you throw enough money at something then you'll win, football isn't always like this. More often than not money will help gain results up to a certain level, this applies in business as well, but you can't guarantee it will always make you win because sometimes the intangibles (team spirit, superior product, sheer bloody-mindedness, luck etc) come into effect and you can't really buy them.
 
semi-pro waster said:
Fair? What has that got to do with the price of cheese?

City can't be a monopoly when it comes to a football league unless they buy up all the other teams in the league, they may have a de facto monopoly on being able to buy the most expensive players/pay the highest wages but that assumes that a) the selling club will sell to City and b) the player is only motivated by wages.

You'd also appear to be assuming that if you throw enough money at something then you'll win, football isn't always like this. More often than not money will help gain results up to a certain level, this applies in business as well, but you can't guarantee it will always make you win because sometimes the intangibles (team spirit, superior product, sheer bloody-mindedness, luck etc) come into effect and you can't really buy them.
Click to expand...
Indeed, not to mention team x having a financial advantage over team y happens in every level of football.

Not once have I moaned at Utd having the money to buy big players, so I really can't start now that it's someone else's turn.
 
Semi-pro owaster - thanks for the well thought out response.

I think this cheese will leave a bad taste in most cases & the assumptions of A & B you mention will likely be yes, time will tell.
 
gjc10212 said:
I don't think the FA should allow this type of buy out to go ahead as it's clearly not fair, and as a business City will be a monopoly surely!? Scenario - Chelsea, Man Utd, Ars. & Liv. bid for player - City then steamroller and buy all..what is the max squad size a team is allowed? Spending will no doubt exceed the total profit made by the club just to save face (did you hear the arab owner talk about steamrolling to get to the top...).

I expect there will now be a super league setup for the ultra rich clubs.....??
Click to expand...

Its already been like that for the last xx years. Blackburn did it, newcastle almost did it, Manu have been unsettling players for years. Newcastle went in for rooney, manu outbid them. Then chelsea and now finally we can have someone to steal players from under the nose of them.

The teams most worried will be liverpool and arsenal because in the next couple of years if Man city are serious one of those will fall out of the elite top 4.

Not just can then outbid these other teams they have the financial clout to raise the wages a bit further again than chelsea did. Thats the real danger. Old robhino and whoever follows him will be taking serious amounts of money. Wait to fat frank hears what someone else is getting.

The gulfs about to get even bigger.
 
dannyjo22 said:
True but your not considering the wild spending...
Click to expand...

wedgie said:
You seem to be disputing the level of mediocrity here...
Click to expand...

I'll try and explain the point I'm trying to make better.
When RA took over Chelsea they were far, far nearer to being one of the top sides in the country/Europe than City are now and I'm not claiming that they would be where they are now without his cash, much of it spent correctly.
What I'm saying is that for City it'll be much harder to get to where they want to be and I can't see them doing it in the next few years just by splashing money around as there's more to it than just that as the massive spending of a few other clubs prove:)
 
Good old Spurs dropping yet another complaint, get some ******* balls. We got our man, despite everything Levy rambled on about he backed down in the end, cracking stuff.

Don't care what we paid, its worth it to see Levy crawl back into his hole.
 
£31mil is a very decent sum for a 27 year old who's really only lived up to his full potential for 6 months of his Premiership career.

Spurs must have made a very tidy profit this transfer window.
 
Ripper said:
Good old Spurs dropping yet another complaint, get some ******* balls. We got our man, despite everything Levy rambled on about he backed down in the end, cracking stuff.

Don't care what we paid, its worth it to see Levy crawl back into his hole.
Click to expand...

no different than the red nose jock complaining about real madrid. Hes hardly going to refuse £31million either, especially when we paid just over 10mill. He isnt worth that, Keane was a better player and he went for £20m
 
topshot said:
no different than the red nose jock complaining about real madrid. Hes hardly going to refuse £31million either, especially when we paid just over 10mill. He isnt worth that, Keane was a better player and he went for £20m
Click to expand...
It's quite different actually. Spurs were delaying to get the maximum fee possible, which in itself is common, but Levy also took every opportunity to play the victim.
 
its a bit of a dilemma if you are a city fan


you welcome the investment...but then you would cringe when you hear them talking about global branding...the die hard supporters will be slowly left behind as will the history of the club

we run the risk of supporters who tunr up to watch the games being an irrelevance as the club becomes more focused to a television audience in far flung parts of the world


in my opinion its only a matter of time before somebody suggests playing a game here at a daft time to suit a television audience in another part of the world..screw the fans here, we make more money from the tv audience
 
FTM said:
its a bit of a dilemma if you are a city fan


you welcome the investment...but then you would cringe when you hear them talking about global branding...the die hard supporters will be slowly left behind as will the history of the club

we run the risk of supporters who tunr up to watch the games being an irrelevance as the club becomes more focused to a television audience in far flung parts of the world


in my opinion its only a matter of time before somebody suggests playing a game here at a daft time to suit a television audience in another part of the world..screw the fans here, we make more money from the tv audience
Click to expand...
You're joking aren't you? Half an hour after the news broke there were City fans parading about with rags taped to their heads.
 
FTM said:
its a bit of a dilemma if you are a city fan


you welcome the investment...but then you would cringe when you hear them talking about global branding...the die hard supporters will be slowly left behind as will the history of the club

we run the risk of supporters who tunr up to watch the games being an irrelevance as the club becomes more focused to a television audience in far flung parts of the world


in my opinion its only a matter of time before somebody suggests playing a game here at a daft time to suit a television audience in another part of the world..screw the fans here, we make more money from the tv audience
Click to expand...

Yeah, i completely agree, i mean, the number of games Chelsea have had reschedualed so those damn Ruski's can see the game nice and early in the day.


You do infact realise that with the club being physically based in the UK and no known method to uproute the stadium and drag it to another country they will continue to play in the English league, which has its times decided here, and ticket sales vastly, VASTLY outweigh tv revenue as an income source for a club. Arsenals income has gone up over 50mil a year due to the extra ticket sales and some extra corporate space aswell. What games do you think would get moved to a more appropriate time of day, and why would fans go at 3am to a game, and more importantly the police would never agree to let it happen. In essense, your post is beyond ridiculous.

AS for chasing TV revenue, City just got bought out by a group that has 100's of billions between them, you think they care , even slightly, about 10mil in TV revenue? YOU think the clubs turnover, maybe 100mil a year, would even show up as a significantly amount in their accounting books? the 30mil they just spent will probably just mean a weeks pocketmoney for one of the princes has gone missing ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom