offix Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 (edited) From The Sunday Times; Manchester City's Middle Eastern owners are ready to spend more than $1bn (£610m) on transfer fees and wages in their first year in control of the club. I am so glad that ML seems to be a much more sensible new owner, and does not seem to invest a fortune on buying an "instant" team of stars. I wonder if any real ManCity fan will still feel quite the same affinity with a bunch of mercenaries on giant wages as they did with their club in previous years? And what happens when the owner pulls out? Edited 19 July, 2009 by offix Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 Yeah, I bet the City fans are gutted. I would love it if ML splashed the cash, I don't get this affinity ******, all footballers are mercinaries, most of the best ones are not English. They will have just as much affinity with Tevez as they did with Goater, there is no difference except one is better and cost more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 From The Sunday Times; Manchester City's Middle Eastern owners are ready to spend more than $1bn (£610m) on transfer fees and wages in their first year in control of the club. I am so glad that ML seems to be a much more sensible new owner, and does not seem to invest a fortune on buying an "instant" team of stars. I wonder if any real ManCity fan will still feel quite the same affinity with a bunch of mercenaries on giant wages as they did with their club in previous years? And what happens when the owner pulls out? Lol.......we're paying for it, they just raise the price of oil a few pence...we're all shareholders in City:rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clapham Saint Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 From The Sunday Times; Manchester City's Middle Eastern owners are ready to spend more than $1bn (£610m) on transfer fees and wages in their first year in control of the club. I am so glad that ML seems to be a much more sensible new owner, and does not seem to invest a fortune on buying an "instant" team of stars. I wonder if any real ManCity fan will still feel quite the same affinity with a bunch of mercenaries on giant wages as they did with their club in previous years? And what happens when the owner pulls out? This Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redondo Saint Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 Welcome to today's world of football. If you want an old fashioned style of club football you need to look at non-league - and even some of those players will move for an extra tenner. ML has only been here 5 minutes, I hope he does spend some money as our current squad will not get us out of this division. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saints foreva Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 I hope ML does spend a fair bit of money on transfers, but not the stupid fee's that are being paid for a single player (should we get back to the champ/prem). Should the owners of city get bored and sell the club on, they may find that hard as this could leave City in sh!t loads of debt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sentry Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 Yeah, I bet the City fans are gutted. I would love it if ML splashed the cash, I don't get this affinity ******, all footballers are mercinaries, most of the best ones are not English. They will have just as much affinity with Tevez as they did with Goater, there is no difference except one is better and cost more. Actually Goater cost less than Tevez! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glasgow_Saint Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 Yep I bet Man City hate having an ambitious owner, must suck ass Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joesaint Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 Yeah, I bet the City fans are gutted. I would love it if ML splashed the cash, I don't get this affinity ******, all footballers are mercinaries, most of the best ones are not English. They will have just as much affinity with Tevez as they did with Goater, there is no difference except one is better and cost more. MLT? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joesaint Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 Citys owner cant spent a billion every couple of seasons, I feel he may see what he can do and then leave them in the... If he can't sell them which I feel he wont be able to do because of there debt (he could pay outright why get in debt and pay extra) because he can spend the money and then leave them in deep poo. Saying that I'm no finance expert just my point of view, for me stability is most important. We are no world-wide brand, but I do feel we can perform at the highest level with the right management with the required support. COYR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisobee Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 Well I heard that Man City now have 9 strikers who could potentially be 1st team choices so maybe one more and they can field a goalie and 10 strikers with John Terry on the bench ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
70's Mike Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 Well I heard that Man City now have 9 strikers who could potentially be 1st team choices so maybe one more and they can field a goalie and 10 strikers with John Terry on the bench ! must be worth approaching them to see who they will let out on a seasons loan hurts me to say the name but Benjani springs to mind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisobee Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 must be worth approaching them to see who they will let out on a seasons loan hurts me to say the name but Benjani springs to mind Do you think he's good enough for us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisobee Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 must be worth approaching them to see who they will let out on a seasons loan hurts me to say the name but Benjani springs to mind Actually I'm sure they must have at least one whole team they could loan to us !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arizona Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 Welcome to today's world of football. If you want an old fashioned style of club football you need to look at non-league - and even some of those players will move for an extra tenner. ML has only been here 5 minutes, I hope he does spend some money as our current squad will not get us out of this division. I disagree. With out current squad and -10, we could easily get out this division next season, through the back door. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John B Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 must be worth approaching them to see who they will let out on a seasons loan hurts me to say the name but Benjani springs to mind I think Hull have the same idea http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/gossip_and_transfers/8157807.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 Yep I bet Man City hate having an ambitious owner, must suck ass i would hate it too.. im glad we have progressed the "saints" way and gone throught the leagues... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VectisSaint Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 Actually I'm sure they must have at least one whole team they could loan to us !! Possibly true, unfortunately FA rules preclude this. No more than 2 (?) from any club I think... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisobee Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 Possibly true, unfortunately FA rules preclude this. No more than 2 (?) from any club I think... Yes, 2 sounds right to me so I'd be happy with Bridge and Robinho !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 From The Sunday Times; Manchester City's Middle Eastern owners are ready to spend more than $1bn (£610m) on transfer fees and wages in their first year in control of the club. I am so glad that ML seems to be a much more sensible new owner, and does not seem to invest a fortune on buying an "instant" team of stars. I wonder if any real ManCity fan will still feel quite the same affinity with a bunch of mercenaries on giant wages as they did with their club in previous years? And what happens when the owner pulls out? its been the way for ages - fans enjoy success, money buys success - Blackburn, Chelsea, Man U all buy titles are their fans love it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan The Flames Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 I wouldn't mind ML spunking some cash on us by I would prefer a slower organic growth that the mindless spending at Man City. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisobee Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 its been the way for ages - fans enjoy success, money buys success - Blackburn, Chelsea, Man U all buy titles are their fans love it Well I guess Blackburn have won the League Cup in recent years but even Pompey managed to win the FA Cup !! Just compare that to us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisobee Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 I wouldn't mind ML spunking some cash on us by I would prefer a slower organic growth that the mindless spending at Man City. Oh Man City are spending stupid money. 9 English players out of 32 players in their 1st team squad. Though to be fair they have signed/re-signed Bridge, Barry and SWP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arizona Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 They seem bent on some Real Madrid-esq quest to have a squad full of strikers. It strikes me as a bit odd. No way they're going to keep Adebayor, Tevez, Robinho, Bojinov, Santa Cruz, Caicedo, Benjani, Jo and Bellendamy happy. I can already see Jo never returning to Eastlands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The9 Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 From The Sunday Times; Manchester City's Middle Eastern owners are ready to spend more than $1bn (£610m) on transfer fees and wages in their first year in control of the club. I am so glad that ML seems to be a much more sensible new owner, and does not seem to invest a fortune on buying an "instant" team of stars. I wonder if any real ManCity fan will still feel quite the same affinity with a bunch of mercenaries on giant wages as they did with their club in previous years? And what happens when the owner pulls out? Oh yeah, tragic. Apart from the fact that everyone's doing it, and they just have more resources. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 Well I guess Blackburn have won the League Cup in recent years but even Pompey managed to win the FA Cup !! Just compare that to us their league title didn't come cheap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hopkins Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 2 Things. 1) We'd ****ing love it if ML did the same for us. It's how you become succesful in football nowadays. You spend money and loads of it. Even Villa who spend a fair bit are not quite good enough. Same with Everton. Anybody who says they wouldn't, is not being realistic. For any club to break into the top 6 now you need to spend money. And the more you spend the more chance of success. Hate people who say its ruining the game. No its not. Its making the prem more interesting and more appealing to be involved in. 2) Don't get the massive over reaction of citys so called 8 strikers. Only Adebayor, Tevez and Santa Cruz are any good. Robinho will be used as a winger and has never been an out and out striker. Caicedo is guff. Jo will never return unless he scores shed loads for Everton this season. Boijinov will be sold to an italian club shortly and Bellamy will play the odd game here and there and effectively is there 4th striker. Which every club needs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan The Flames Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 Hate people who say its ruining the game. No its not. Its making the prem more interesting and more appealing to be involved in. But its an arms race where the few are leaving the rest of the pack behind. It has always been about money, but is was also about clubs building a side that could compete. This isn't the case now, Everton, Villa, Spurs won't break into the top 4 until someone finances them, that in my book is crap. One good thing that Man C having all this cash is it will knock one of the top four out of the top four, and it will be interesting to see how they cope without their now guarenteed dose of champ league cash Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The9 Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 2 Things. Hate people who say its ruining the game. No its not. Its making the prem more interesting and more appealing to be involved in. Erm, how is guaranteeing that only 3 of the teams in a 20-team contest have even the remotest chance of winning it "making it more interesting"? It's a boring load of predetermined and tedious guff and I'm watching less and less football by the year, as the contests become fewer and fewer and the processions more and more. Anyone who thinks the Prem is exciting is deluded. It's a strong brand because English Football is regarded as a kind of spiritual home and the money brings the best players - often just to sit in Chelsea's reserves and sell Man U shirts in China. But the football as a contest is frequently dull when the BorInG 4 play each other and one-sided when they beat the others. And of course no-one gives a cack about Wigan v Bolton, etc. Bolton who've won the League before but hav no chance of ever winning it again, Wigan who leapt on the moneyman bandwagon early and are reaping the rewards. Yawn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The9 Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 It has always been about the money Unless you mean the Prem, money was barely a factor in football until the 1980s. Minimum wage survived into the 1960s and even in the 80s the vast majority of top players were only making double the average wage for a short career. It was the "big club" grabbing of the post-1990 middle-class money in the game and all the plastic fans (who suddenly started spending money on football products if not actually going to games) which made money the issue. Premier League cutting it's money off from the Football League and the subsequent tv deals instigated and hen perpetuated the chasm, and CL money assists the split further, raising global awareness and money streams for only the select few. Boring football, sometimes I'm glad we're out of it instead of chasing the glory of 7th in the Premier League and the right to play in the detestable "Europa League" of international also-rans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 The9 you say who cares about Bolton and Wigan..... Well Bolton and wigan fans.. Having unfashionable vlubs is clearly not exclusive to England. For Years liverpool won everything with everyon challenging not long ago it wad either arsenal or man u. Now we have another team surely about to break the monopoly of the top 4 and people are hugely negative about it. For god knows how many years money talks in football and today is no different Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan The Flames Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 Unless you mean the Prem, money was barely a factor in football until the 1980s. Minimum wage survived into the 1960s and even in the 80s the vast majority of top players were only making double the average wage for a short career. It was the "big club" grabbing of the post-1990 middle-class money in the game and all the plastic fans (who suddenly started spending money on football products if not actually going to games) which made money the issue. Premier League cutting it's money off from the Football League and the subsequent tv deals instigated and hen perpetuated the chasm, and CL money assists the split further, raising global awareness and money streams for only the select few. Boring football, sometimes I'm glad we're out of it instead of chasing the glory of 7th in the Premier League and the right to play in the detestable "Europa League" of international also-rans. Building a successful side has always revolved around buying the best and paying the most. So money has always been a factor in delivering success. But you could through good signings, training and youth set up at least compete with the bigger spenders. I agree the gulf has grown too wide and money is now the only thing that can bring success, football is slowly disappearing up its own arse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deep_is_blue Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 Should the owners of city get bored and sell the club on, they may find that hard as this could leave City in sh!t loads of debt. i've never understood this argument, certainly it's correct when talking about teams such as pompey, who's players they bought are not fantastic. but if you are man city in three years, and the owners have left... all you need to do is sell the players! you would have an incredible wealth of players sitting there, transfer fees alone to other clubs would cover any costs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offix Posted 19 July, 2009 Author Share Posted 19 July, 2009 I wouldn't mind ML spunking some cash on us by I would prefer a slower organic growth that the mindless spending at Man City. That's precisely my point. I am afraid that the mindless spending at ManCity will bite them in the ass sooner than they expect. "Organic growth' as you put it provides a lot more stability in the long run, and that is exactly what we need right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EFM Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 From The Sunday Times; Manchester City's Middle Eastern owners are ready to spend more than $1bn (£610m) on transfer fees and wages in their first year in control of the club. I am so glad that ML seems to be a much more sensible new owner, and does not seem to invest a fortune on buying an "instant" team of stars. I wonder if any real ManCity fan will still feel quite the same affinity with a bunch of mercenaries on giant wages as they did with their club in previous years? And what happens when the owner pulls out? Me too. I'd far rather struggle and toil in the lower divisons for several years than aim for the moon. Who wants success after all? It's hugely over-rated and no fun. Give me a poorly paid job and a life of misery over winning the lottery any day I say. I'll be a better man for it although deeply unhappy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Lightjaw Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 invest Not aimed at us or any posters on here, but I love the term "invest" (investment). I think sometimes fans of football clubs confuse that word with "gift". Whereas if you replaced "invest" with "loan" or "debt", you would get a different outlook as to how a football club is run. Big money signings don't look so hot when we wake up and realise Santa aint real. The Natwest recently "invested" £500 in me (overdraft). Might pay it back one day .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farawaysaint Posted 19 July, 2009 Share Posted 19 July, 2009 i've never understood this argument, certainly it's correct when talking about teams such as pompey, who's players they bought are not fantastic. but if you are man city in three years, and the owners have left... all you need to do is sell the players! you would have an incredible wealth of players sitting there, transfer fees alone to other clubs would cover any costs. In theory yes but Man City are offering silly wages.. Owners leave and the club tries to sell any players they'll first have to find a club willing to match the silly wages. Many players would much rather just run down their contract at city, what do they care if the club folds? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisobee Posted 20 July, 2009 Share Posted 20 July, 2009 2 Things. Hate people who say its ruining the game. No its not. Its making the prem more interesting and more appealing to be involved in. Not to watch though, frankly I can often hardly be bothered to watch even MOTD. Years ago I'd not think of missing it and record it if I was out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david in sweden Posted 20 July, 2009 Share Posted 20 July, 2009 Oh Man City are spending stupid money. 9 English players out of 32 players in their 1st team squad. Though to be fair they have signed/re-signed Bridge, Barry and SWP. I wonder which language they use on the pitch ..? ....surely not Welsh, boyo ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david in sweden Posted 20 July, 2009 Share Posted 20 July, 2009 their league title didn't come cheap Money doesn't buy success all the time. Blackburn are the only team outside the "Big Four" who have won a Premiership title (1994-95) , and that was only because their then-owner Jack Walker gave Kenny Dalgleish a blank cheque book to buy whom he wanted. He did it --once only --and had to use three former Saints players to do it . (Shearer, Flowers and Kenna) - after that the team spilt up and Blackburn were relegated in 98-99. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisobee Posted 20 July, 2009 Share Posted 20 July, 2009 I wonder which language they use on the pitch ..? ....surely not Welsh, boyo ... Lol, only Hughes and Bellamy I suspect. Otherwise I imagine they have about 25 translators to pay as well !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 20 July, 2009 Share Posted 20 July, 2009 money is now the only thing that can bring success, Funny how this is forgotten when we talk about burley at saints and the money he had oh well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisobee Posted 20 July, 2009 Share Posted 20 July, 2009 Money doesn't buy success all the time. Blackburn are the only team outside the "Big Four" who have won a Premiership title (1994-95) , and that was only because their then-owner Jack Walker gave Kenny Dalgleish a blank cheque book to buy whom he wanted. He did it --once only --and had to use three former Saints players to do it . (Shearer, Flowers and Kenna) - after that the team spilt up and Blackburn were relegated in 98-99. Yes and 2 English players and an Irish player and not silly money either given the quality of the players. Did we not sell Kenna to finance the purchase of Gordon Watson which proved good business especially as I think we had Dodd to play RB anyway ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidthesquid Posted 20 July, 2009 Share Posted 20 July, 2009 I hope we do it the right way - debt free we are a wealthy team for this division and the CCC. I don't want us to buy success with silly money (even relative to our rivals). I'm not saying we shouldn't spend to improve the squad, but what we can afford. Buying success is a) hollow and b) fragile. Ask our little chums down the road. I have spoken to a few of them over the years and winning the cup for them seems to mean almost less to them than getting to the final did for us. That was because our team was OUR team - we had lads in that team who had either come up through the ranks (ie Bridge, Oakley, Baird) or made their name with us (ie Beattie, Marsden) - put together over a few seasons. Poopey's team was almost entirely bought for that season at a ludicrous cost in wages and fees and there wasn't the same emotional investment. And now, of course, the day of settling up is upon them and it doesn't look pretty. Mr Gaydalek has had his fun and wants out. I want our new owners to back us for the long-haul, but also for the club to be self-sustaining, with good youngsters getting a go and success being achieved by prudent management and a club that is united. If we do that we can be back in the Prem, punching above our weight and enjoying every moment of success because of it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larrylove Posted 20 July, 2009 Share Posted 20 July, 2009 I hope we do it the right way - debt free we are a wealthy team for this division and the CCC. I don't want us to buy success with silly money (even relative to our rivals). I'm not saying we shouldn't spend to improve the squad, but what we can afford. Buying success is a) hollow and b) fragile. Ask our little chums down the road. I have spoken to a few of them over the years and winning the cup for them seems to mean almost less to them than getting to the final did for us. That was because our team was OUR team - we had lads in that team who had either come up through the ranks (ie Bridge, Oakley, Baird) or made their name with us (ie Beattie, Marsden) - put together over a few seasons. Poopey's team was almost entirely bought for that season at a ludicrous cost in wages and fees and there wasn't the same emotional investment. And now, of course, the day of settling up is upon them and it doesn't look pretty. Mr Gaydalek has had his fun and wants out. I want our new owners to back us for the long-haul, but also for the club to be self-sustaining, with good youngsters getting a go and success being achieved by prudent management and a club that is united. If we do that we can be back in the Prem, punching above our weight and enjoying every moment of success because of it Excellent post couldn't agree more,I think(hope)AP is as hungry and up for it as he senses we are! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonManager Posted 20 July, 2009 Share Posted 20 July, 2009 I hope we do it the right way - debt free we are a wealthy team for this division and the CCC. I don't want us to buy success with silly money (even relative to our rivals). I'm not saying we shouldn't spend to improve the squad, but what we can afford. Buying success is a) hollow and b) fragile. Ask our little chums down the road. I have spoken to a few of them over the years and winning the cup for them seems to mean almost less to them than getting to the final did for us. That was because our team was OUR team - we had lads in that team who had either come up through the ranks (ie Bridge, Oakley, Baird) or made their name with us (ie Beattie, Marsden) - put together over a few seasons. Poopey's team was almost entirely bought for that season at a ludicrous cost in wages and fees and there wasn't the same emotional investment. And now, of course, the day of settling up is upon them and it doesn't look pretty. Mr Gaydalek has had his fun and wants out. I want our new owners to back us for the long-haul, but also for the club to be self-sustaining, with good youngsters getting a go and success being achieved by prudent management and a club that is united. If we do that we can be back in the Prem, punching above our weight and enjoying every moment of success because of it I concur. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 20 July, 2009 Share Posted 20 July, 2009 you all would love it if markus threw money at us and we paid our way back to the premiership.. it woud be fun IMO...at least we would see a winning team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hughieslastminutegoal Posted 20 July, 2009 Share Posted 20 July, 2009 Hate people who say its ruining the game. No its not. Its making the prem more interesting and more appealing to be involved in. Will you be so keen on it when they top few clubs have p*ssed off into a Euro Elite league? Will it have made the prem more interesting and appealing? Maybe it will, but to those who wanted a more competitive league in the first place, which too much money at a handful of clubs is preventing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 20 July, 2009 Share Posted 20 July, 2009 To be honest - I am not too fussed but the spending - the fact remains that player A is 2 x as good as Player B - just because someone is prepared to spend £80 mil on player A and only £8 mil on B does not make A suddenly 10 x as good! Teams have shown that with the right manager, development and coaching a team can achieve beyond the sum of its parts - the trick is less about spending ten of millions on players, and more about keeping your own when they have a couple of good seasons and agents tap them for triple wages at another club... and a short cut to trophies... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eelpie Posted 20 July, 2009 Share Posted 20 July, 2009 you all would love it if markus threw money at us and we paid our way back to the premiership.. it woud be fun IMO...at least we would see a winning team From Pilchards report I reckon AP will be going straight to ML. I can't wait. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now