Media coverage 2018/19

[bugsyblue]

Interesting read, especially the second half. The only one that I think will really hurt is is Sancho.

 

[GaudinoMotors]

Criticised for self-funding now - we can't win.

 

[JRockBlues]

Just when i thought they were taking a breath they start on that,no doubt the 300m is a figure plucked out of their arses

Isn't two thirds of that the amount the Rags are willing to pay for Sancho?

 

[cookster]

Here we go. The Daily Fail now leading with "Manchester City's lost academy. £300 million worth of young talent deserted City".

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/index.html

The transfer table is interesting (since Pep arrived). They have sales as 134.4m and the current player values at 239.5m.

They have Sancho valued at 100m which is a myth, so that's the difference right there. They've also not factored in the loan fees we have received for the players (many have been on loan before selling) and the sell-on clauses in the contracts.

Let's compare to United who let Pogba go for free and bought him back for 90m and 300k a week. Or signed Sanchez for 30m and pay him 400k+ a week for 4.5 years.

The Mail know the Dipps, Rags, Chavs etc will lap it up though.

 

[Fame Monster]

Looking at some of the players, I think a lot of them simply weren't good enough to make it here at the time.

With Trippier, he had Richards and Zabaleta ahead of him so no chance.

Selling Iheanacho and Diaz was good business for the money we got for them.

I think the only mistakes we've really made is not giving Lopes more of a chance (I thought he could have made it at the time for us) and selling some of our promising centre-backs.

I always thought Denayer and Rekik had potential and were both technically gifted and I've always thought there's enough room in the squad to have a 4th choice centre back from the academy. I think our biggest mistake on that front was probably letting Ben Mee go who would have been a perfectly adequate 4th choice centre back for us and it would have been good to have another local born player in the dressing room given the difficulty of keeping 4 top quality centre-backs happy (as we're seeing with Nico).

By the same token and due to squad restrictions, there's a good argument for having a second choice goalkeeper drawn from the academy and hopefully we'll keep Muric. Letting Kasper Schmeichal on the cheap was arguably a mistake but we had Joe Hart at the time and Schmeichal's too good to be a second choice keeper.

 

[cookster]

Posted in the media thread:
The transfer table is interesting (since Pep arrived). They have sales as 134.4m and the current player values at 239.5m.

They have Sancho valued at 100m which is a myth, so that's the difference right there. They've also not factored in the loan fees we have received for the players (many have been on loan before selling) and the sell-on clauses in the contracts.

Let's compare to United who let Pogba go for free and bought him back for 90m and 300k a week. Or signed Sanchez for 30m and pay him 400k+ a week for 4.5 years.

The Mail know the Dipps, Rags, Chavs etc will lap it up though.

 

[Blue Llama]

Isn't two thirds of that the amount the Rags are willing to pay for Sancho?

I would be very surprised if any club was prepared to pay 100M for Sancho at this stage of his football experience. The figure is a guesstimate by the media based on an assumption that united are interested in him. So are all the other figures, time and time again papers make up the numbers to escalate their stories. More accurate stories to be found in the Dandy and Beano than in the Daily fail. I have seen 2 different stories (not sports based) in the last 12 months taken down after I pointed out technical errors in them by the stringer who had concocted them.

 

[kaz7]

The transfer table is interesting (since Pep arrived). They have sales as 134.4m and the current player values at 239.5m.

They have Sancho valued at 100m which is a myth, so that's the difference right there. They've also not factored in the loan fees we have received for the players (many have been on loan before selling) and the sell-on clauses in the contracts.

Let's compare to United who let Pogba go for free and bought him back for 90m and 300k a week. Or signed Sanchez for 30m and pay him 400k+ a week for 4.5 years.

The Mail know the Dipps, Rags, Chavs etc will lap it up though.

They didn't even know who Sancho was then he left us and over night became the hottest property in the world who became the poster boy for our failed academy,if he is a 100m player he would be in our first team,i'm not clicking on it but from what you say the figures are made up to sound as bad a possible

 

[chesterbells]

This Rabin guy is outstanding and he has got a follow from me.

But I am just going to stick this out there, accompanied with my tin foil hat.

I reckon he’s a plant.

Does it matter?

 

[dronefromsector7G]

Thanks Bilboblue!!...and thanks to all the blues for your support...I assure you I'm not a group of people nor that intelligent (ask my wife). I've been in finance and specifically lending for over 20 years, a profession that makes one quite cynical and often nosey. The "research" that I've done is basically googling stuff on my phone, figuring out anamolies and raising questions. I'm nowhere in the class of someone like PrestwichBlue.

I am a little overwhelmed at the support, (I used to have 150+ followers till Sunday morning!!). I am also surprised at how rattled these tough reporters have gotten, I thought they would have swatted my questions easily. These aren't necessarily bad actors, they are youngsters (mostly) who are caught in a tough business of generating excitement and clicks for their survival. But what they see as fair game is extremely unfair, on the club, the players, the management team and importantly fans. It undermines the result of years of obsessive hard work and passion. And mostly their work seems to be basis lazy copying of themes, zero evidence (MacKenna especially), loose association of facts and very little research or understanding.

Anyhow I don't intend to make it a habit of targeting anyone, but when I see obvious hypocrisy, I hope to raise my voice in defence of the club . If anything over the last 4 days, I've made some good friends and very thankful for that. I am on a break for a few days to mentally regroup and focus on a few personal projects but hope to be back on twitter soon. Thank you once again!!

Rag

 

[kaz7]

Yes that's why I said it's a balanced article , as it mentions it

It's not balanced,sancho worth 100m should be a clue,the other figures are wrong

 

[cookster]

They didn't even know who Sancho was then he left us and over night became the hottest property in the world who became the poster boy for our failed academy,if he is a 100m player he would be in our first team,i'm not clicking on it but from what you say the figures are made up to sound as bad a possible

TBF he's had an excellent spell at Dortmund and will fetch a decent fee if he leaves this Summer, 100m I highly doubt but if anyone is stupid enough look no further than the Rags.
You're right about him being used as a negative story against us.

 

[chesterbells]

Don’t know why we are surprised. The BBC is an organisation who turned a blind eye to the likes of Jimmy Saville for years. If they can do that, emails about biased football reporting isn’t even gonna register.

I can see you’ve got a couple of Likes for this, but for me:
1) agree with the criticism of the BBC re City, and
2) agree with the criticism re Saville.

But to link the two is absolutely crackers imho.

 

[Fame Monster]

Sancho's worth every penny of £100M if we've got a sell-on clause on him.

We just need to leak it to United that we're thinking of buying him for that price and watch the dumb fuckers outbid us by £20M.

 

[Scareye]

The academy is doing exactly what it was designed to do. It’s basically another value stream. If it turns up the odd Foden along the way all the better.

 

[Tim of the Oak]

The academy is doing exactly what it was designed to do. It’s basically another value stream. If it turns up the odd Foden along the way all the better.

The purpose of the academy is to develop young players for the first team squad as well as pay for itself. There won’t be many who make it because of the level of competition.

 

[Scareye]

The purpose of the academy is to develop young players for the first team squad as well as pay for itself. There won’t be many who make it because of the level of competition.

Pretty much what I just said mate, just in a slightly less media friendly way.

 

[Kompany Car]

I can see you’ve got a couple of Likes for this, but for me:
1) agree with the criticism of the BBC re City, and
2) agree with the criticism re Saville.

But to link the two is absolutely crackers imho.

Not really a link but it was more the point that if they don’t give a toss about something that important, a few of us complaining is unlikely to have any effect. The BBC will not admit they are wrong, even if the truth is staring them in the face.

 

[Silva2021]

I’ve always said the academy is about giving kids away into football. The education we give is second to none and we should have no issue with it.

It is hard for anyone to make it at Citybut as Foden is showing not impossible. I thought the article could have mentioned his contribution to winning the league especially against his goal against Spurs.

Foden now has 2 league winners medal, none of the ones who left have that!!

We do run into a situation where players have 1-2 year left on their contract and we want them to renew but they don’t due to a lack of first team opportunities and believe there future is best served elsewhere. At this point there is very little value in loaning and unless they are exceptional and ready they won’t be in the first team. The sensible solution is to sell and possibly buy back/ sell on clause.

Can something be done about this, I don’t really see how.

We will struggle to bring through a lot of youth at the same time and I do think that is the issue Diaz and Sancho had that Foden was the priority so got the limited game time there was.

The article is fairly balanced and shows how much we have made. Regardless what anyone says the only team that have benefitted from Sancho more than us so far is Dortmund. We have still got 10 million, a reported sell on amount. So better than nothing.

Give it a good 10 years and we’ll see where it is, but looks a success to me!

 

[Mraitch]

Here we go. The Daily Fail now leading with "Manchester City's lost academy. £300 million worth of young talent deserted City".

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/index.html

Another way to look at it is that we have provided a wonderful opportunity for young players to develop under the guidance of quality coaches at unrivalled facilities and provided a superb private academic education. This has resulted in these young men securing a future as professionals in the game. They are welcome.