No, not really.
Proper run down:
Chelsea - bought the league
Arsenal - brilliant
Liverpool- rubbish
Man City- bought the league
Man Utd- bought the league
Tottenham/Newcastle/Everton - not competing
So only 1 good all round team there then yeh?
No, not really.
Proper run down:
Chelsea - bought the league
Arsenal - brilliant
Liverpool- rubbish
Man City- bought the league
Man Utd- bought the league
Tottenham/Newcastle/Everton - not competing
You've picked an odd set of figures there as it's just transfer spend and not net transfer spend which is clearly the more important one. i.e.
# Nett Spend 92 - 2011
1 Chelsea £515,965,000
2 Manchester City £473,627,000
3 Liverpool £226,235,000
4 Manchester United £177,310,000
5 Tottenham £168,832,500
6 Aston Villa £128,115,000
7 Sunderland £103,985,000
8 Newcastle £99,820,000
9 Fulham £91,686,000
10 Wolves £57,024,000
11 Stoke City £53,485,000
12 Everton £52,975,500
13 West Bromwich Albion £39,112,499
14 Queens Park Rangers £29,143,500
15 Arsenal £21,616,000
16 Bolton £16,300,000
17 Wigan £9,022,500
18 Swansea City £7,142,500
19 Blackburn Rovers -£3,723,000
20 Norwich City -£15,625,000
Namely it shows how ridiculously well Arsenal have done in the transfer market over the last 10 years - there is a whole Emirates stadium (390 million) difference just in transfer fees between Chelsea/City and ArsenalFactor in wages too and I think Chelsea have spent almost a billion pounds more than Arsenal
![]()
No other team in the league can compete with United's worldwide fan base which has been built up over many decades, so without rich owners they will simply not be able to compete with them financially, this was more or less the case pre-Abramovich (bar Arsenal under Wenger) and it showed by United winning the league virtually every year.
I think a lot of Man United fans are just bitter because they are no longer the wealthiest or most attractive club to play for in the EPL, when it comes to signing players they are not used to having to feed off of scraps like the rest of the league had to during Man United's dominant years.
I think a lot of Man United fans are just bitter because they are no longer the wealthiest or most attractive club to play for in the EPL, when it comes to signing players they are not used to having to feed off of scraps like the rest of the league had to during Man United's dominant years.
I think a lot of Man United fans are just bitter because they are no longer the wealthiest or most attractive club to play for in the EPL, when it comes to signing players they are not used to having to feed off of scraps like the rest of the league had to during Man United's dominant years.
You're basing this bitterness on what?
JDeeLFC said:I wouldnt call them bitter, more just gutted that there joint closest rivals have the wealthiest owner in football and has bought them the league when they have worked hard for the last 20 years for what will seem **** all.
Constantly claiming that Chelsea/City bought the title as if they believe that United won all of theirs without the aid of any money.
who's said that?![]()
Most manyoo fans
The era of teams gradual success and decline is now over. Due to 1 thing. Cash. Man City is the epitome of that. 2 seasons ago they were no where. Football isnt about becoming the best in an instant, its about the highs and lows and the success throughout the years that makes fans loyal and foes respectful. I have no respect for Man City what so ever.
You can blame Kenny and his scouts for targetting the wrong players, but surely this is just as likely (possibly even more likely) to happen at smaller clubs too.
But prior to the rich owners United were the biggest spenders in the last 20yrs (Ferdinand, Veron, RvN, Berbatov, Yorke, Cole, Stam etc), since 1993 United broke the English transfer record five times to get the players they wanted, even going back to the 60s they made a few other British record signings due to their wealth advantage over others.
When Chelsea/City become big worldwide brands like United they won't need sugar daddy owners splashing the cash to attract players, but to become big brands they needed to invest in players up front and break United's strangehold on the EPL and to win trophies, without investment they would have just continued as 'also ran' teams whilst United mop up yet more titles and attract all of the best players through their dominance/success.
So tell me how Liverpool failed so dismally (in relation to how much they have spent in the last 18 months) if its ONLY down to money
Im sorry, but its clearly not.
You can blame Kenny and his scouts for targetting the wrong players, but surely this is just as likely (possibly even more likely) to happen at smaller clubs too.
Can also blame him for his tactics and man management skills too..
His team was stuck in the 80's, creating chances on the basis the other team isn't as good so they must score, when in reality a bit of focus on decent goal scoring moments would be much more sensible.
So tell me how Liverpool failed so dismally (in relation to how much they have spent in the last 18 months) if its ONLY down to money
Im sorry, but its clearly not.
You can blame Kenny and his scouts for targetting the wrong players, but surely this is just as likely (possibly even more likely) to happen at smaller clubs too.
Chelsea have spent £60m on hiring and firing managers in the last 12 /24 months (given the double hit on AVB), and the same again on players - yet look at their league position - and there is no gaurentee anyone they buy will settle in England / perform straight away
Newcastle and to a lesser extent Spurs did brilliantly to finish where they did , and maybe the odds are against them to do it again, but its still very possible
All this talk of money infuriates me, but at the same time im the fool who pays £40 to watch the game. Rock and hard place pop to mind. Its a dim future for club football if regulations are not brought in.
Either you have to accept people buying success, or you have to accept Manyoo and Arsenal winning everything, basically. Unless, of course, we move to a system where we have a salary cap and shared revenues up to that cap (so everyone has enough money to max out the salary cap).
Chelsea and Citeh spending outside money was the only way to compete with Manyoo. Without them doing so, Manyoo could have just abused their dominant position... in a way! (They make TONNES of money, because of past success, and could just use that additional money to fuel on-going success... so they'd be nothing to crack the status quo!) They spent a lot, but they needed to, in order to attract the right players at the right time.
That's not Manyoo's fault, of course.