UEFA Champions League Final Man City v Inter Milan ** spoilers ** [Saturday 10th June 2023 @ 8pm]

This is probably the first champions league final I can remember where I’m just not interested. I’m not sure I’ll watch, I mean I will but it’s just a massive meh.

City are just far superior, I’m tempted to put a bet on them to win 5 or 6-0.

Is it possible to bet it’ll be the most one sided final ever in terms of score?
 
adam cool dude said:
Everyone could have done what United did in the 90's in terms of investment but they didn't did they? Well some did but not to the scale United did which they should be applauded for.

The whole myth about United outspending everyone is tiring too. Yes we had big individual spends but that was because we had a nucleus of home grown players that cost nothing. In the whole 90's Newcastle and Blackburn had higher net spends bar 1998/99. The Italian and Spanish leagues far outstripped United in spending power too. Inter had R9 Ronaldo, Juve Zidane, Barcelona Rivaldo. European teams now are weak by comparison.


My point is everyone had the chance to do what United did but today not everyone has unlimited oil money glitch.

People also say the league is more competitive now. I fail to see it. It took 41 points to survive relegation in the 98/99 season. That would have relegated everyone up to 13th this season. The league maybe more competitive at the pointy end but across the board it really isn't.
Click to expand...

I never really thought about that but it’s certainly an easy narrative/trap to fall into.

I think the league is worse, city and Liverpool in recent years have been getting 90+ in several seasons. That’s an uncompetitive league, we all use to skate Spain when it was happening there. It’s basically turning into the SPL on steroids and maybe even Germany even then BvB should have won the league this year!
 
Last edited:
BaZ87 said:
As part of UEFA's learning from the disaster of last seasons final, they're advising fans to get to the stadium at 2pm :o At least the Europa and Conference League final's went smoothly without any sort of issue :/
Click to expand...

Didn't you know it takes 8 hours to get everyone in and sat down??
 
adam cool dude said:
Everyone could have done what United did in the 90's in terms of investment but they didn't did they? Well some did but not to the scale United did which they should be applauded for.

The whole myth about United outspending everyone is tiring too. Yes we had big individual spends but that was because we had a nucleus of home grown players that cost nothing. In the whole 90's Newcastle and Blackburn had higher net spends bar 1998/99.
Click to expand...

Only if you conveniently leave out out wage expenditure from club expenses. UTD's wages as a percentage of revenue back in the 90's would have been higher than City recently. That's a guess by the way, a hunch. There's no need to be defensive about it though, no one really gives a hoot. But white washing history to suggest UTD were purer than others is a bit of nonsense.
 
Trusty said:
Only if you conveniently leave out out wage expenditure from club expenses. UTD's wages as a percentage of revenue back in the 90's would have been higher than City recently. That's a guess by the way, a hunch. There's no need to be defensive about it though, no one really gives a hoot. But white washing history to suggest UTD were purer than others is a bit of nonsense.
Click to expand...

I am not white washing history at all but to try and put United's history down to a similar way City's is just doesn't work.

The Premier League is a behemoth unheard of in the European game today. You have Bournemouth who have higher revenues than Ajax and AC Milan. It is utterly stupid. Having English teams dominate today is considered normal. When United won the Champions League in 1999. It was against the odds. The Spanish and Italian leagues were spending far more money and the German league was equally as strong.

It annoys me when 20 something kids think that Cities upcoming treble is even remotely comparable.
 
adam cool dude said:
I am not white washing history at all but to try and put United's history down to a similar way City's is just doesn't work.

The Premier League is a behemoth unheard of in the European game today. You have Bournemouth who have higher revenues than Ajax and AC Milan. It is utterly stupid. Having English teams dominate today is considered normal. When United won the Champions League in 1999. It was against the odds. The Spanish and Italian leagues were spending far more money and the German league was equally as strong.

It annoys me when 20 something kids think that Cities upcoming treble is even remotely comparable.
Click to expand...

Pep has been at City for 6/7 years, won the PL 5 times but hasnt won the CL. Not sure if it makes that much difference, City aren't going to be doing treble trebles or anything.
 
Last edited:
Trusty said:
Only if you conveniently leave out out wage expenditure from club expenses. UTD's wages as a percentage of revenue back in the 90's would have been higher than City recently. That's a guess by the way, a hunch. There's no need to be defensive about it though, no one really gives a hoot. But white washing history to suggest UTD were purer than others is a bit of nonsense.
Click to expand...

No, they famously didn’t go above 50% during Fergies era. It was the same when Fergie said that when he found out how much wenger was earning at Arsenal he kicked up ****.

Reddit - Dive into anything

www.reddit.com www.reddit.com

That’s the first link on google but I’m pretty sure i remember hearing that on Tifo or some random money pod about football.
 
adam cool dude said:
It annoys me when 20 something kids think that Cities upcoming treble is even remotely comparable.
Click to expand...
Agreed, it's harder and more competitive at the very top than when United won it. Even this years Manu team won more league games than the treble winning team. The 99 team would get smashed by this years City team but that's no shame, it's the best team PL ever assembled.
 
Last edited:
BaZ87 said:
If you tune in around the same time UEFA want City fans to arrive it'll be about 9pm.

I'm not sure UEFA have realised that City have 15 fans and it won't take 8 hours to get them into the stadium.
Click to expand...

True.

My mate and his dad wanted tickets yet seem to have ended up with 6 as they spreads around requests with a few other season ticket holders they knew and yet all of them got tickets.

That would be unthinkable at virtually any other club.
 
dannyjo22 said:
Agreed, it's harder and more competitive at the very top than when United won it. Even this years Manu team won more league games than the treble winning team. The 99 team would get smashed by this years City team but that's no shame, it's the best team PL ever assembled.
Click to expand...

No it’s not. The gulf is getting bigger. Right across European football.

This is a good article from a couple of years back - https://www.independent.co.uk/sport...l-man-utd-barcelona-real-madrid-a9330431.html

The last decade alone, which represents the true rise of the super-clubs alongside the huge rise in money, has seen:

  • a second Spanish treble
  • a first German treble
  • a first Italian treble
  • a first English domestic treble
  • three French domestic trebles in four years
  • a first Champions League three-in-a-row in 42 years
  • the first ever 100-point season in Spain, Italy and England
  • ‘Invincible’ seasons in Italy, Portugal, Scotland and seven other European leagues
  • 13 of Europe’s 54 leagues currently seeing their longest run of titles by a single club or longest period of domination.
And away to get another English treble.

The Utd, PSV, Ajax and Celtic trebles are much more impressive. Celtics probably the most due to they won the league cup and everyone was born locally.

Celtic have also just completed a domestic treble.
 
Last edited:
I bet you City don't win 13 of 21 league titles like United did. Forget Europe I wasn't discussing Europe. You have to win game after game after game on the trot to win the league these days. Not draw 13 plus games like United and Arsenal used to. The standard now is much higher.
 
dannyjo22 said:
I bet you City don't win 13 of 21 league titles like United did. Forget Europe I wasn't discussing Europe. You have to win game after game after game on the trot to win the league these days. Not draw 13 plus games like United and Arsenal used to. The standard now is much higher.
Click to expand...

They’ve already done 5/6 and will do 6/7. Best Utd done was 4/6.

The rest of the league is pretty poor lets be honest, they could have easily got over 90 points again this year if they had too.

Arsenal came from no where this year the gap could and probably should have been 15-20 points. Liverpool finished > 20 points this year behind after going close last year trying to push City. They didn’t have a great season point wise the year before either with Utd coming from no where to finish second. Liverpool over the last two season only have 6 more points than Arsenal. We’ve had 2 good title races in the last few years both when Liverpool came up short the others have been dire.

FWIR Utd only had 2 season where they ran away with it, around the 3 peat and Fergies last year. Chelsea under Jose ran away with it too. Rest it was all pretty close.

Battering everyone every week and getting 90+ points every year is hardly a competitive league.

Anyway enough of this chat :D
 
Reuben klang said:
No, they famously didn’t go above 50% during Fergies era. It was the same when Fergie said that when he found out how much wenger was earning at Arsenal he kicked up ****.

Reddit - Dive into anything

www.reddit.com www.reddit.com

That’s the first link on google but I’m pretty sure i remember hearing that on Tifo or some random money pod about football.
Click to expand...

Yeah, i'm not sure which part of my post youre replying to. I only said that wages as a percentage of revenue might be higher than City now. UTD's wage bill is still higher than City in real terms. But not as a percentage of revenue though (99% sure)
 
dannyjo22 said:
The 99 team would get smashed by this years City team but that's no shame, it's the best team PL ever assembled.
Click to expand...

There is a combined 99/City team thingy on the BBC at the moment, it's actually a lot closer than you'd think in terms of putting players in the starting 11. Pitches, balls, boots have come a long way in 20 years, the arena/equipment players have nowadays is a lot more conducive to prettier football so to speak. The 99 players would be able to do what Pep wants though.
 
Trusty said:
Yeah, i'm not sure which part of my post youre replying to. I only said that wages as a percentage of revenue might be higher than City now. UTD's wage bill is still higher than City in real terms. But not as a percentage of revenue though (99% sure)
Click to expand...

Citys is currently* 62%, Utd is 65%.

Utd during the fergie era didn’t go above 50%, so which ever way you look at it City’s is higher.

They also have an inflated revenue stream with Etihad deals, so would be even higher % of revenue.

*from the latest accounts.

adam cool dude said:
Man Utd done 5/6. You could also argue they would have done 5 in a row if Cantona didn't get suspended in 95.
Click to expand...

When? Ah just looked it up. Seen they won 3 in a row in the late 90s/early00s
 
Last edited:
Reuben klang said:
This is probably the first champions league final I can remember where I’m just not interested. I’m not sure I’ll watch, I mean I will but it’s just a massive meh.

City are just far superior, I’m tempted to put a bet on them to win 5 or 6-0.

Is it possible to bet it’ll be the most one sided final ever in terms of score?
Click to expand...
City lost to Spurs in the semis a couple years ago. If they can lose to Spurs, then can lose to anyone ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom