If you can prove to me with a valid argument then I’d change my mind but so far I see nothing but money being thrown around to buy some of the best players in the league
You must log in or register to comment.
Can tell you’re young but fergie did this shit countless times.
how do you explain United spending more than City over the past decade then and being shit that entire time?
Other than Leicester, name someone who didn’t buy their success
I often used to see United fans saying things like they didn’t “buy their success like city” it was organically generated by the club lol
City won 300m from their treble last season. By this logic they should have been way ahead in the table especially with their world best manager.
Last time Man Shitty have world class players like Uwe Rosler, Steve Lomas and Nicky Summerbee….much better than the current crop 😘
Well you’re right, Man City does indeed buy success. On the other hand, the remaining teams try to buy success but fail.
Honestly, all teams buy it now imo, just to different levels. Its become a game of money.
We spend a lot less than Chelsea and united, and we’ve got excellent players for a smaller fee than they deserve. Eg, Haaland, and it helps pep is one of the best managers in the world
Your current squad costs 5m less than Man United’s so wouldn’t say you spend a lot less!
You spend more on wages. Paying players under the table as usual, etc
I think the issue that is missed when talking about City’s spend now is there is still benefit from previous high spend based on sold players. In seasons that there was 200/300 million spent, that player value was never “lost” might have dropped a bit but is still present.
By selling those players they don’t need anymore after the high level of investment it makes the net spend look alot more reasonable. E.g. last window 241m was spent but they sold 114m (€). Those sales involved players like Laporte who was bought at the peak of city spending.
You can attribute some of their success to the money but it detracts from their scouting, managers etc. man Utd have spent more, why aren’t they as successful?
It’s not a two dimensional thing.
You can’t have sustained success without money but you can fail with it
You need two things to succeed, good management and money.
Teams like Chelsea and Man United have money but bad management.
Teams like Brighton have good Management but no money.
City have good management and money
Teams like Brighton have good Management but no money.
You mean apart from the ~£500m of investment their owner put in to build the club to what it is?
And now the huge profits they have made from player sales, like ~£100m for Caicedo, ~£50m for White, and ~£60m for Cucarella?
Other than that… no money.
Almost all modern day sporting success is down to money. In English Football before Man City it was Chelsea who were challenging Man Utd, who they themselves kept buying players. Arsenal had a few one off years of success. Blackburn also had a year of success thanks to Jack Walkers money. Before Man Utd was Liverpool and Everton thanks to the Moores family in the 70’s-80’s. Before that you are going back to Man Utd in the 50’s-60’s who bought all the good youngsters.
Im sure the correlation to money and results goes all the way back. Remember reading that the early 1900’s shows the same thing. Sort of explains why its always cities which have the best team, towns and villages didn’t have as many fans so couldn’t compete in monetary terms in the early days.
In a more general reply, Buying the best player doesn’t guarantee success. Man Utd have bought a lot of seriously good players. Its the whole club that makes a team competitive. Man city are very well run and their facilities and academy help too. Lazy to just insinuate money is the only reason.
How DARE you bring logic here 😤
And no commas!
That’s not how “proof” works.
If you have a belief, it is on you to prove it, not for others to disprove it.
I’m not saying you’re wrong, but how would you prove your statement OP?
Every company tries to buy success some have more means and do it better than others
It’s bad now in terms of the total amount of money spent but the reality is it has always been the same since professional football formed. Apart from the odd exception such as Blackburn Rovers or Leicester winning the prem league, the champions are always one of the top spending teams.
Blackburn were the first check book club. They spent a rediculous amount of money for the time and won because of it, just that the numbers look smaller than we’re used to and they faded fast, so people just forgot thats what happened
I’m waiting for the day that a team with zero wages and zero transfer fees challenges for the cup.