Greenlizard0 Weekend Football Thread ** spoilers ** [8th - 12th September 2017]

That is always misleading imo. For example we made more off the sale of Januzaj this year than we did off the loss of Evra. Which weakened our team more? It matters more to the smaller clubs who are selling players they generally would like to keep. For the top clubs though most are selling players they don't need or want (with the odd exception like Neymar of course) The likes of City and Chelsea stockpile players and send them out on loan until they sell them so their money in from transfers will always be higher than ours. if you're taking into account that extra source of money then you should absolutely take into account United's extra revenue.
 
There should be a poll regarding how many games people think it'll take for Palace to score. It could be a long haul at this rate.

*edit* That should have been it from Benteke, but it just won't go in.
 
Another game, another loss... Is this the end for De Boer - I still hope not, but we just couldn't finish today :(
 
Feel a bit for De Boer, what can he possibly do about a monumental mistake like that? Sure he picked the player, but no one can envisage that sort of schoolboy error.

They had plenty of chances to get something from the game as well, players letting him down big time at the moment.
 
Clear red for Sanches. Should be banned for that in retrospect but it's not Newcastle so who cares, plus he played for Bayern so he must be good. Canny pass the ball 5 yards though.
 
Poor from Abraham, it's good defending to get back but he should never have been given the chance to make that block.

Sanches has been a pile of steaming horse manure in this game.
 
woppy101 said:
You are jumping the gun, but the more I see him the better he looks
Click to expand...

Obviously I was being hyperbolic, but he's superb. Seems to have everything. Decently mobile, great first touch, great in the air, great tackling and positioning, lovely short passing and vision, superb spacial awareness, and he's genuinely skillful. Love him already.
 
FrankJH said:
Even though he was blatantly faking , the decision itself wasnt the problem - it was how it was enforced

(not to mention all the soft fouls given in Stoke's favour throughout the match)
Click to expand...

I have no idea what you're talking about Frank. You said it was an awful decision - it wasn't as officials are instructed to stop the game if there's a head injury. I'm not sure how you expect the ref to see that he was faking it either or how other decisions in the game effected that one.

FrankJH said:
Utd's turnover is vastly different though, the spend itself is only 1/2 the story
Click to expand...
As I said, a club's turnover has no relevance to the points sigma raised :confused:
Shamikebab said:
Because more should be expected of a club that spends 80% of it's revenue than a club that spends 8% of it's revenue. Same way that £30m spent on a player today is entirely different to £30m spent on a player 20 years ago. If you're spending a lower percentage of your revenue then it's less of an impact on the club finances and you're more able to sustain that level of spending on a consistent basis.

If it doesn't matter then why are we taking players sold into account? What does that have to do with the amount a club has spent?
Click to expand...

Going by that we should expect Brighton and Huddersfield to be challenging for the title? Percentage of revenue only tells you how affordable your spending is (although City could spend 100x what Utd spend and it would still be more affordable to them) - it has no bearing whatsoever on what your expectations should be or as I said, are you expecting Brighton to be challenging for the title? :confused:

How much a club brings in through sales is relevant when looking at how much money they had available to them to build/improve their squad. If you start with a £200m squad and you sell every player and spend £300m, it's far harder to end up better off than if you start with a £200m squad and add £200m worth of players to it.

Again, sigma's point was looking at how much City had spent, what they should be capable of and what the reaction would be if Utd spent as much. Utd spent as much, have a squad as costly, if not more costly as City's and should (in theory) be equally as capable.
 
So us making a shed load of money isn't relevant, but City selling players that didn't even play for them is relevant?

I'm not sure why you've decided one method of making money can't be considered but the other can.
 
Shamikebab said:
So us making a shed load of money isn't relevant, but City selling players that didn't even play for them is relevant?

I'm not sure why you've decided one method of making money can't be considered but the other can.
Click to expand...

One method of making money has no bearing on the strength of your squad, the other clearly does. City lost 8 senior players from their squad last season - that's not including players that were out on loan that were subsequently sold, even though that's only a delayed effect (from a transfer spend pov) on their squad rather than no effect.

I'll ask again, are you expecting Brighton to challenge for the title seeing as their spend to turnover ratio is probably around the same as Utd's?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom