FA Cup Final - Man City vs Stoke

Tummy said:
Yet again missed the point Cheets! Woo well done.

My point was it's a sad day for football when unsuccessful clubs can just throw half a billion at a team and then win a Cup.

Manchester United / Real et all were all massive clubs who've spent money.
Click to expand...

To be fair though would United have been as successful as they were if they couldn't retain their talent / buy others. They reaped the benefits of being significantly richer than the competition for many years and even now can afford Rooney being a **** a few months back. At the end of the day a great manager can only take his side so far.

That kind of money always starts from somewhere at one point.
 
Manchester United had rich owners many years ago, but they've always spent within their means iirc :)

I don't agree with clubs like Chelsea / Manchester City having little modern history and then buying a team for half a billion and winning a cup. They're spending way above and beyond their means and ruining the transfer market, they're going for instant success. They should, imho develop and grow a squad capable of doing so.
 
Ideally yes, and arm chair fans would love it.

However it's sadly more financially prudent to go for the quick fix method. Win trophies, increase the stock of the club, get more support etc. etc. City's investments really have paid off this week - the Champs League is as we know a right ol' gold mine.

Training players costs a lot of money, and usually I'd say only 1 or 2 out of 10 will make it for their original club. Sometimes they'll be able to ply their trade elsewhere in which case it's hoped their sale will generate adequate compensation.
 
Agree and disagree. Arsenal are ran very well, don't spend *too* much, while I take the point they're a massive club they're doing everything the right way (Yes I know they spend a lot on wages)

Whats to stop owners taking over, getting a World class youth system and just spend within their means. They could then see in ~5 years producing future National players and not having to throw ~a billion at a team. You don't *have* to throw a billion at a team, it's still not gotten Chelsea anything in Europe.
 
Greenlizard0 said:
Ideally yes, and arm chair fans would love it.

However it's sadly more financially prudent to go for the quick fix method. Win trophies, increase the stock of the club, get more support etc. etc. City's investments really have paid off this week - the Champs League is as we know a right ol' gold mine.

Training players costs a lot of money, and usually I'd say only 1 or 2 out of 10 will make it for their original club. Sometimes they'll be able to ply their trade elsewhere in which case it's hoped their sale will generate adequate compensation.
Click to expand...

Good point.
 
Tummy said:
Agree and disagree. Arsenal are ran very well, don't spend *too* much, while I take the point they're a massive club they're doing everything the right way (Yes I know they spend a lot on wages)

Whats to stop owners taking over, getting a World class youth system and just spend within their means. They could then see in ~5 years producing future National players and not having to throw ~a billion at a team. You don't *have* to throw a billion at a team, it's still not gotten Chelsea anything in Europe.
Click to expand...

But then if they're English, would that side have to spend significantly more to keep them? Once again they'd be very expensive as we all know how much our players cost.

If the youth systems up and down the country aren't right, then an overhaul's required, again that's expensive and adds to the risk it may not pay off.

You also say 'spend within their means'. I appreciate that but as odd as it sounds - both Abrahmovic and Sheikhwhatshisface are in an odd way doing this. It's a lot of money thrown down but in a few years both clubs won't be bankrupt or end up like Leeds.
 
Spain isn't really a good comparison as they don't get TV money in the same way English sides do. Real / Barca got the television money and as a result could spend lots more, also Real were bank rolled by politics were they not?

Spurs and Everton both broke in to the top four and just failed to build upon it. A boost would be a boost in to 3/4th in the league? It's all about constantly improving. I don't agree with just throwing money at a problem in football.
 
Man United main thing was getting all the fans from around the world and country to buy into Manchester United the brand thats what got them money, in ths 90s they got lucky with Fergie and the kids but still bought players at top cost like teams City do now, they are just buying them all at once, not really a problem if they come to dominate for the next 20 years and bring up players through the ranks.

Once Fergie goes, well see how good Man United really are.
 
cheets64 said:
Man United main thing was getting all the fans from around the world and country to buy into Manchester United the brand thats what got them money, in ths 90s they got lucky with Fergie and the kids but still bought players at top cost like teams City do now, they are just buying them all at once, not really a problem if they come to dominate for the next 20 years and bring up players through the ranks.

Once Fergie goes, well see how good Man United really are.
Click to expand...

Thats not really the case though. It is very hard to throw money at something "all at once" and make any sort of lasting legacy.

Yes Man Utd do buy players but in 90% of cases it is players on the way up and they go on to be better players while at United. Look at our strikers. Hernandez is the new kid on the block, Berbatov was the big signing, Owen a free transfer and Rooney signed as a wonderkid. All these guys are at different points in their career and looking for different things so will take their turn in the rotation system.

Now look at City strikers - Bellamy, big money out on loan. Adeybayor - Big money out on loan, RSC big money out on loan, Dzeko big money struggling so far, Balotelli big money struggling so far, Tevez big money wants to leave. How do you keep all these guys happy? You cant because they all believe they should be playing and dont want to sit on a bench. You cant build any team spirit in these situation when you are throwing money at a player and if he doesnt hit the ground running he is simply replaced by the next big name. City, at the time of their signing probably have far more big name players up front than United but which set would you actually want to have?
 
Moses said:
It's not realistic, though, is it? The biggest clubs are raking it in through the Champions League + massive commercial revenues... clubs like Chelsea/Citeh needed the ~artificial~ boost up, just to make up for all the additional riches the top four have been raking in.
Click to expand...

couldnt said it better myself ;)
 
Moses said:
It's not realistic, though, is it? The biggest clubs are raking it in through the Champions League + massive commercial revenues... clubs like Chelsea/Citeh needed the ~artificial~ boost up, just to make up for all the additional riches the top four have been raking in.
Click to expand...

Plus it's difficult for the poorer clubs to build up a top squad slowly because if they get any sort of special player the big clubs generally swoop in and buy them (e.g. Everton with Rooney).

Chelsea/Man City have both made huge initial investments and the short term success it has brought has allowed them to kick on and attract the players that would have previously snubbed them, they've effectively broken the monopoly on top players that the elite clubs had.
 
mmj_uk said:
Plus it's difficult for the poorer clubs to build up a top squad slowly because if they get any sort of special player the big clubs generally swoop in and buy them (e.g. Everton with Rooney).
Click to expand...

again this is very much true, ie Andy Carrol for us - but then he went for the money didnt he. Over the years Ive seen clubs bring in unheard players and they turned out to be quality, a season in the bigger clubs are poaching them. Chris Smalling been another example. Theres tons you could mention, but your spot on, how can any club build a decent squad when bigger teams start poaching them, once the club gets into the players head he wants to leave. Darren Bent from Sunderland to Villa been another example.
 
toon_mad said:
again this is very much true, ie Andy Carrol for us - but then he went for the money didnt he. Over the years Ive seen clubs bring in unheard players and they turned out to be quality, a season in the bigger clubs are poaching them. Chris Smalling been another example. Theres tons you could mention, but your spot on, how can any club build a decent squad when bigger teams start poaching them, once the club gets into the players head he wants to leave. Darren Bent from Sunderland to Villa been another example.
Click to expand...

Im not following you around to disagree with you....but.................:p

Andy Carroll left Newcastle because a club bid a crazy amount of money for him. Mike Ashley could have said "No" at any point. Carroll was on offer for £1m a year or so previously, whats wrong with accepting a bid of £35m?

Smalling was a signing from non-league who Utd offered again, a crazy amount of cash for. Fulham were well within their rights to accept or reject as they saw fit. To be honest i think Fulham could do more with the money than they could do with keeping Smalling. It was a good move for all parties.
 
toon_mad said:
not you again! :D

those were not the best examples i gave, but ive seen lots of players develop through so called lesser clubs, then a season or two later be aproached by bigger teams.
Click to expand...

Is that not the nature of football though? Its how smaller clubs survive. Even at a club the size of Newcastle thats 3 £10m players paid for by Carroll, one or more of whom could be resold for much more if he does well.
 
placeholder said:
Is that not the nature of football though? Its how smaller clubs survive. Even at a club the size of Newcastle thats 3 £10m players paid for by Carroll, one or more of whom could be resold for much more if he does well.
Click to expand...

I understand clubs needs to cash in on there assets sometimes, but not all the time does a club who have successfully managed to lure or develop a player want to lose him for money.

This is especially hurtful for teams when they lose players in January, if a club is struggling in the league, the last thing they need is a bigger club poaching or changing the mind set of players, ie Tottenham hunting Charlie Adam, he was crap for a while after the January transfer closed because all of a sudden he had his mind set on Tottenham. Not once did any club even consider Charlie Adam as a premier league player when Blackpool were in the Championship, it was only until they won premier league status clubs started poaching him. Just recently he has got his form back, scored there winner today too. Had he left for Tottenham in the January window, Blackpool might be struggling slightly worse. Which concludes my point that whenever a so called small club lure or develop a player, the bigger teams hunt them down. Whether its good business or not, how can the lesser teams grow to be a force when there prized assets are sold off. In the Charlie Adam example, if Blackpool sold him for say £15-£20mil or whatever, thats good business, but then if they get relegated it will prove to be not the case. :)
 
toon_mad said:
I understand clubs needs to cash in on there assets sometimes, but not all the time does a club who have successfully managed to lure or develop a player want to lose him for money.

This is especially hurtful for teams when they lose players in January, if a club is struggling in the league, the last thing they need is a bigger club poaching or changing the mind set of players, ie Tottenham hunting Charlie Adam, he was crap for a while after the January transfer closed because all of a sudden he had his mind set on Tottenham. Not once did any club even consider Charlie Adam as a premier league player when Blackpool were in the Championship, it was only until they won premier league status clubs started poaching him. Just recently he has got his form back, scored there winner today too. Had he left for Tottenham in the January window, Blackpool might be struggling slightly worse. Which concludes my point that whenever a so called small club lure or develop a player, the bigger teams hunt them down. Whether its good business or not, how can the lesser teams grow to be a force when there prized assets are sold off. In the Charlie Adam example, if Blackpool sold him for say £15-£20mil or whatever, thats good business, but then if they get relegated it will prove to be not the case. :)
Click to expand...

Charlie Adam WASNT a PL player prior to actually playing in it. He was hounded of of Ibrox by a support who though he was absolutely honking. If you offered Rangers season ticket holders Charlie Adam or Stephen Hawking as the options in midfield they would have had Stephen making late drives into the box hoping to get his hard drive on the end of something.

Adam suddenly turned out to be great up to January and Blackpool got bids in the region of £8m for him from Spurs and Liverpool. At the same time as Holloway was dismissing them as "derisory" he was happy to keep the player on £10k a week. If he is worth the £20m pricetag, pay him the wages of a £20m player eh?
 
the example I gave, was that Blackpool have been good with or without Adam, but when Adam has played for them he has offered them something good and has often been the difference between them winning a game and losing, i.e today.

The point is, small clubs either develop or scout decent players, then bigger teams just come along and take them. So how can a small team develop, when there star players are sold for money. money alone wont keep teams in the division, especially if they get relegated which costs money anyway.

Really, I could think of lots more maybe better examples, but my point and argument remains the same. How can a small club grow, when bigger teams buy there assets. Its all Im gonna say really about it.
 
toon_mad said:
the example I gave, was that Blackpool have been good with or without Adam, but when Adam has played for them he has offered them something good and has often been the difference between them winning a game and losing, i.e today.

The point is, small clubs either develop or scout decent players, then bigger teams just come along and take them. So how can a small team develop, when there star players are sold for money. money alone wont keep teams in the division, especially if they get relegated which costs money anyway.

Really, I could think of lots more maybe better examples, but my point and argument remains the same. How can a small club grow, when bigger teams buy there assets. Its all Im gonna say really about it.
Click to expand...

But thats just life?

Smaller clubs dont develop players to be successful, they do it to sell them on. For every Rooney that Everton sell and have people lamenting his loss there is a Jeffers who they mugged Arsenal for. The sale of Rooney is the reason there is still an Everton today.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom