Greenlizard0 Weekend Football Thread ** spoilers ** [10th - 15th April 2015]

Football is an old boys club. Carver likely a friend of Harry, thus Harry, anyone related to Harry, they'll all back their friend over anyone else. It's never Harry's fault when he screws up according to everyone who likes him in the media, it was always the owner or the players.

Some of the dire players at Newcastle are simply poor, but there are some okay players, however for half a season under Pardew they played MUCH better and got way way way more points. Carver is a truly awful manager quite clearly, media apologists don't change that. But it also shows why I have almost zero respect for the opinion of the majority of pundits in football. It's a complete circle jerk of them all confirming each others viewpoints to be right and being nice to their friends in football... for potential future jobs in football or for future continued support for interviews and the like.

Every time you get a fresh non football guy in the football media like the BBC2 MOTD guy who asked genuine questions and was critical of pundits views they end up gone very quickly. He had the temerity to call them out on stupid opinions, didn't tow the "be nice to managers" line, he got fired as the ex footballers/ex managers didn't like him.
 
BaZ87 said:
Southampton are doing well after selling half their side and they're still only going to finish a couple of places above where they finished the season before and outside the CL spots. And as you said, it's only a one off season so far and it'll only be a one off season because if it's not the big clubs will pick off their best players again.
Click to expand...

Even if they sell the two most frequently mentioned members of their squad, Schneiderlin and Clyne, its not going to be like last season where they needed/couldn't resist selling off two or three others. Adding the £40-50m those two players would raise to some of the EPL prize money could well strengthen their squad as a whole -although admittedly they could have Europa to contend with too if they stay where they are.

BaZ87 said:
The idea that a smaller club can build organically to consistently challenge at the top of the table is fairy tail BS. Take Spurs for example. They're the most carefully run club in the PL and have built their side organically - they had a couple of seasons where they challenged for the top 4 spots when 2 or more of the 5 bigger clubs than them were a mess but it didn't last.
Click to expand...

It could be argued that Spurs nearly always sell off their prime asset - now whether that's because that player doesn't believe Spurs can get further or whether its something else is another matter. Individually, player for player, Spurs have bigger stars than Southampton and possibly more talented - but as a team, the latter is better and a more balanced squad so less likely to struggle after losing one or two big players (if they do lose them).

It also has to be said, even if its still a couple of years away, the larger stadium will help Spurs dramatically in competing with those above and around them (capacity increase of ~66%) which should help with attracting bigger stars / paying larger wages etc etc. Same with Anfield when the extensions are completed.


BaZ87 said:
FFP is BS. Not even the most hardened Utd fan could argue that City's owners haven't been good for football and Manchester as a City. Equally not even the most hardened Utd fan could argue that the Glazer's haven't been bad for Utd. FFP would have stopped the City takeover happening (as they wouldn't have done it if they couldn't compete) but the Glazers would have still walked into Utd.
Click to expand...

Without the dodgy sponsorship deals the City owners would have been good for football, but its much more debatable including that factor.

Purdy said:
snip.
Click to expand...

Given the squad rebuild (and possibly/probable) new manager required at City, I think there is an opportunity for someone either this season (with the bad attitude of the City players still apparent) or possibly even next season to overtake City. That does depend on them finishing 4th or lower this season which is by no means nailed on yet of course. Even taking OT tinted glasses off for a moment, unless they hire a really respected manager who can bring two or three BIG players with him and an in depth knowledge of the EPL as well it may be hard to actually attract the real quality players in the summer to the "end" of the cycle (ie at the start of the squad rebuild with potentially a new manager in a new league). Obviously Hart (despite all the grief he gets here), Silva and Aguerro and possibly Kompany if he sorts himself out over the summer are the spine of the side worth keeping.......and Bony as a sub , 2nd striker.....but who else is really worth keeping without severely bucking their ideas up - and even then some are just at the wrong age with contract renewals with this kind of season behind them to be definite re-signs.
 
Last edited:
Uh I'm not sure exactly what you're getting at, my posts were never mainly about City rebuilding and what they're doing

FrankJH said:
It could be argued that Spurs nearly always sell off their prime asset - now whether that's because that player doesn't believe Spurs can get further or whether its something else is another matter.
Click to expand...

You weren't replying to me, but yes they do. The player knows Spurs won't become a consistent contender because Sprus can't spend the money to do so + the player will get paid double else where. That is never going to change
 
Last edited:
Purdy said:
Uh I'm not sure exactly what you're getting at, my posts were never mainly about City rebuilding and what they're doing
Click to expand...

Given that the City manager is the most in trouble at the moment /for the summer, and the widely considered state of the City squad (their consistency since Christmas has been non -existant......or constantly bad), they are potentially the team Liverpool/Southampton/Spurs have to overtake for top 4

Purdy said:
You weren't replying to me, but yes they do. The player knows Spurs won't become a consistent contender because Sprus can't spend the money to do so + the player will get paid double else where. That is never going to change
Click to expand...

It should change in the next couple of seasons when their new stadium is opened, they should at least be able to push on from where they have been "stuck" for how ever many years . Newer /bigger stadium apart from the bigger revenues from ticket sales etc should mean potential for bigger commercial contracts too etc etc
 
I don't see how City struggling (potentially, I really doubt it) for a year or two is going to turn any other team into a regular top contender(the title, not fourth place...), which is what I originally said so I don't see how it is really at all relevant
 
FrankJH said:
I dont think its fair that the likes of Stoke, Everton, AV and all the other well established epl teams struggle with sponsorship / recruitment etc ( comparitively) while the likes of Chelsea spend VASTLY over their earning resources because the owner can write it off without blinking.
Click to expand...

Get with the times Frank, Chelsea don't do that any more so when discussing FFP you're going to need another example.
 
The only way realistically to break into the top 4 (and stay there) in the prem right now is to have a wealthy owner (Chelsea/City).

The champions league and sponsorship deals mean that the current top teams have a huge financial advantage over the chasers. Any smaller team which does well will just get its best players poached.

I'm all for wealthy owners injecting money into the prem (and the UK) as long as that money is not adding to the debt of the club. The premier league would have been much more dull without Chelsea and City doing well recently.
 
FrankJH said:
Even if they sell the two most frequently mentioned members of their squad, Schneiderlin and Clyne, its not going to be like last season where they needed/couldn't resist selling off two or three others. Adding the £40-50m those two players would raise to some of the EPL prize money could well strengthen their squad as a whole -although admittedly they could have Europa to contend with too if they stay where they are.
Click to expand...

Frank, Southampton turned over around £100m last season (it won't be much different this season), do you honestly think they can consistently compete with Liverpool, Man Utd, Man City, Arsenal and Chelsea?

Everything that could have gone well for Southampton this season did and several of the bigger clubs have had poor seasons and yet Southampton still won't make it into the CL. It would take a miracle for them to qualify for the CL and if they ever did it would only be a one off because they cannot compete financially, not in a million years.

They cannot afford to keep their best players or attract top class players because they don't have the revenue that the bigger clubs have. The best they can hope for is to continue to do what they done last summer, sell and then buy well but that's incredibly hard to maintain and even if things go well it almost certainly still won't be good enough.
FrankJH said:
It could be argued that Spurs nearly always sell off their prime asset - now whether that's because that player doesn't believe Spurs can get further or whether its something else is another matter. Individually, player for player, Spurs have bigger stars than Southampton and possibly more talented - but as a team, the latter is better and a more balanced squad so less likely to struggle after losing one or two big players (if they do lose them).

It also has to be said, even if its still a couple of years away, the larger stadium will help Spurs dramatically in competing with those above and around them (capacity increase of ~66%) which should help with attracting bigger stars / paying larger wages etc etc. Same with Anfield when the extensions are completed.
Click to expand...

As Purdy said, yes Spurs do sell off their best players but there's a reason why. They can't pay the £150k+ per week to keep them. As soon as Spurs start closing the gap their players want to be paid comparable money to the players at the biggest club and/or the biggest clubs want their players. It's a vicious cycle.

As for their stadium, that won't open for another 3 years at best and with the huge costs it'll be a few years after that before Spurs see any significant financial benefit from that. Let's fast forward 7 or 8 years though, Spurs matchday income might rise by £30-40m - that's a drop in the ocean. As I said, last season Spurs turned over £75m less than Liverpool, that figure is likely to be over £100m this current season. That's £100m more every season that Liverpool can spend than Spurs on transfers and wages. Liverpool and City (and Chelsea although who knows when) are also expanding their capacity which will see their matchday income increase at a similar rate to Spurs but the difference is it'll happen sooner and more importantly a lot cheaper than Spurs new stadium too.

Like I said, Spurs have done everything you could possibly do under FFP and they're still no closer to genuinely challenging at the top of the table. All they can do is put themselves in a position where they're in the best place to capitalise on the possibility of 2 of the 5 richer clubs slipping up - the problem is that's usually not enough and it has to happen for several seasons on the spin.

FrankJH said:
Without the dodgy sponsorship deals the City owners would have been good for football, but its much more debatable including that factor.
Click to expand...

Why on earth would City's owners putting huge sums of money into football, which is paying for incredible facilities they're building/built be a bad thing?

Why should a supporter care where that money is coming from? The only reason they're doing it is because the BS regulations are stopping them doing it in a straight forward way.
FrankJH said:
..stuff about City's squad..
Click to expand...

Even with FFP City will still have enough money to maintain their position.
 
Interesting line-up from us today:
------------Mignolet
Johnson--Can--Lovren--Moreno
--------------Lucas
----------Allen--Hendo
----Ibe-----Sterling----Coutinho

I've got it down as a 4-3-3 but I wouldn't be surprised if it's a 3-4-3 with Johnson playing as a CB with Henderson as the RwB.
 
Agree. Not as worrying as if he were a speedy forward like Owen was because he's got less to lose but very worrying in the sense it seems to occur after exerting so little effort.
 
FrankJH said:
You mean like Chelsea being nearly £1BN in debt to their owner

Still doesnt excuse Fifa / Uefa allowing the state to sponsor City well out of whack for their pretty terrible consistancy ( both times they won the league they failed dismally the next season)

Just because the owner has abyss like pockets shouldnt allow that club a free reign otherwise what happens to the league when the owner gets bored and want to walk away?

At least Utd are paying off the debt heaped on thrm by their owners from their own earnings every year, rather than being massively in debt to a holding/ parent company or getting suspect ( to say the least) levels of sponsorship.

Of courae ( for the better of the league) I would like someone to take over a smaller club and over time let them challange the big boys, that would be fantastic - but it HAS to happen organically rather than artificially. I seriously hope that the likes of Southampton etc can grow into pushing the likes of Spurs for Europa places consistantly and year by year growing naturally rather than a new owner pumping in £100m a season into the team from his own pocket and getting bored after a few years and wanting to leave and the club being put in jeapordy
Click to expand...

I seriously doubt united reduced their debt this season with their outlay
 
The only good player in our defense is Can at the moment rest is a worry, Moreno just randomly switches off but i think its not to bad as he doesn't do it every game its just so bad when he does :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom