City & Rags starting line-up costs compared

I shared the original post with a friend of mine who's an Arsenal fan and always hating on City... and here's his reply.


"That's not a negligible difference. I sent you an article earlier in the week, City is one of the top paying teams in all sports. Anyway, city's extravagance is more evident in what they've paid in transfer fees in a short period. I know you have a justification for that, but facts are facts. They spent over one billion dollars buying players in a couple of years, I think you can expect to have a pretty damned good team."


What do I say? I'm so sick of his shit.
 
tomcat said:
Markie07 said:
Wasn't de gay 22mil? worlds most expensive goal keeper some one said the other day?

2nd most expensive, Buffon was ~£30m. I also think that De Gea cost £17.8m? So £18m is basically right.


I love pulling this fact out when they harp on about buying the league, they also forget all the ludicrous prices that they paid in the 90's and early 2000's, they might not be equivalent in numbers but at the time the prices they were shelling out for players is similar in accordance to the economy.


Let's not forget the loan Edwards needed to take out to fund trafford at the inception of the prem.
 
TexasBlueMoon said:
I shared the original post with a friend of mine who's an Arsenal fan and always hating on City... and here's his reply.


"That's not a negligible difference. I sent you an article earlier in the week, City is one of the top paying teams in all sports. Anyway, city's extravagance is more evident in what they've paid in transfer fees in a short period. I know you have a justification for that, but facts are facts. They spent over one billion dollars buying players in a couple of years, I think you can expect to have a pretty damned good team."


What do I say? I'm so sick of his shit.

Over $1Bn? Tell him to actually start with facts and then you might take him seriously. We haven't spent the equivalent of $1Bn in the last 20 years, let-alone the last two.

Edit: Also, tell him he's indeed correct. When you factor for inflation, which is a rather important thing as Rooney and Ferdinand were bought years ago, then the difference is not negligible at all.

No in fact United have spent a rather unfair amount more. Ferdinand would be nearly £50m in today's market, Rooney about £40m+. Berbatov too, who was on the bench.
 
TexasBlueMoon said:
I shared the original post with a friend of mine who's an Arsenal fan and always hating on City... and here's his reply.


"That's not a negligible difference. I sent you an article earlier in the week, City is one of the top paying teams in all sports. Anyway, city's extravagance is more evident in what they've paid in transfer fees in a short period. I know you have a justification for that, but facts are facts. They spent over one billion dollars buying players in a couple of years, I think you can expect to have a pretty damned good team."


What do I say? I'm so sick of his shit.

What do you tell him? Tell him we get to spend and he don't, tell him to suck it up, live with it or quit watching football.
 
LoveCity said:
Tricky_Trev said:
City:

Hart - £5m
Zabaleta - £9m
Kompany - £21m
Lescott - £27m
Clichy - £10m
Barry - £19m
Yaya - £33m
Nasri - £31m
Silva - £31m
Tevez - £45m
Aguero - £50m

CITY TOTAL - £1 billion

Rags:

De Gea - £0m
Evra - £0m
Ferdinand - £0m
Jones - £0m
Smalling - £0m
Carrick - £0m
Scholes - £0m
Young - £0m
Valencia - £0m
Rooney - £0m
Hernandez - £0m

RAG TOTAL - £0m

Fixed.

red-mirrored-goggles.jpg

Fixed again.

goggles.jpg
 
I'm have a similar "discussion" on FB with a rag fan after I posted the line-up costs...I got back....

"I love this argument because it completely divides opinion. Even for me as a United fan I don't like the thought of clubs buying the title but at the same time this has been one of the best seasons the Premier League has seen and has brought about a renewed rivalry that makes the game more interesting, so it can't be all bad... The point around buying the title that grinds on people is all about relativity and that comes in three parts... 1. The speed at which City are spending money; Most of City's big purchases have taken place within a 4 year period, United's big purchases are gradual therefore in a fashion that the club can afford. 2. Value; Taking football out of the equation Man Utd is a £1.5b company, Man City is a £275m company. The thought that a company worth £275m can spend over £400m on assets in 4 years doesn't sit well as they are overstepping their means. 3. Income; To spend the money that United have been spending on players they have also brought in plenty of money over the years from player sales (most notably the £80m from Ronaldo) which has been reinvested in players. This hasn't happened to the same scale at City.
So it's not necessarily a bad thing that a club now has the finances to compete with the big clubs as it makes the game more interesting... but don't expect it to sit well with the neutrals because human nature is such that we'd prefer to see success earnt rather than bought.


Just replied with...

"This argument will run and run. The FACT is that the forming of Utd as a plc (to bypass FA rules...a bit "unethical") back in the early 90s in order to generate big bucks started the ball rolling with major finance in the game...all this before Utd had won a bean in the modern era. Record transfer fees and trophies then followed.
Utd created the devil and now cannot bemoan others following suit. Seems you are only able to buy your success providing you got in there first. As for earning success....so a title for City would only "sit right" if it was done with 11 homegrown players. Talk about hypocritical. Because of course Utd have been bringing them through the ranks for years. Yesterdays starting 11 had 1 ex-retiree as their only "home" player."
 
Keep in mind that in the 6-1 it was Anderson who started over Scholes who was unavailable at the time, and he cost £20.3m. They're right when they say "Money doesn't buy success", they're 2nd.
 
interpol said:
I'm have a similar "discussion" on FB with a rag fan after I posted the line-up costs...I got back....

"I love this argument because it completely divides opinion. Even for me as a United fan I don't like the thought of clubs buying the title but at the same time this has been one of the best seasons the Premier League has seen and has brought about a renewed rivalry that makes the game more interesting, so it can't be all bad... The point around buying the title that grinds on people is all about relativity and that comes in three parts... 1. The speed at which City are spending money; Most of City's big purchases have taken place within a 4 year period, United's big purchases are gradual therefore in a fashion that the club can afford. 2. Value; Taking football out of the equation Man Utd is a £1.5b company, Man City is a £275m company. The thought that a company worth £275m can spend over £400m on assets in 4 years doesn't sit well as they are overstepping their means. 3. Income; To spend the money that United have been spending on players they have also brought in plenty of money over the years from player sales (most notably the £80m from Ronaldo) which has been reinvested in players. This hasn't happened to the same scale at City.
So it's not necessarily a bad thing that a club now has the finances to compete with the big clubs as it makes the game more interesting... but don't expect it to sit well with the neutrals because human nature is such that we'd prefer to see success earnt rather than bought.


Just replied with...

"This argument will run and run. The FACT is that the forming of Utd as a plc (to bypass FA rules...a bit "unethical") back in the early 90s in order to generate big bucks started the ball rolling with major finance in the game...all this before Utd had won a bean in the modern era. Record transfer fees and trophies then followed.
Utd created the devil and now cannot bemoan others following suit. Seems you are only able to buy your success providing you got in there first. As for earning success....so a title for City would only "sit right" if it was done with 11 homegrown players. Talk about hypocritical. Because of course Utd have been bringing them through the ranks for years. Yesterdays starting 11 had 1 ex-retiree as their only "home" player."

You make a lot of very good points but I find it's much more fun to agree with them and shrug your shoulders in a "what are you going to do?" fashion. A sort of Gallic Shrug if you will.

escalette1.jpg


It really seems to annoy them a lot more than trying to justify yourself as they're not listening to your explanation anyway.
 
Under rag (and general media) logic; if I have no job, and win the lottery, I assume I can't buy a big house and a Range Rover because, apart from winning the lottery, I'm not earning anything so therefore I can't spend anything.

Good job they don't run the country.
 
Here's an article I did last Tuesday, not quite on the same subject - it was an analysis of United's team in the aftermath of the derby, and questioning whether they were better on the night than even our reserve players. It hasn't been on Blue Moon as far as I know so here it is:-

THE BLUE ECLIPSE

They say that you can’t buy class. Well, if you’re going by United’s team last Monday night, that might appear to be the case. It’s interesting to compare how their money has stood them in good stead in comparison to us, especially as the media are trying to present them at the moment as the home grown team, battling against our bunch of mercenaries.

It was also interesting to analyse United’s individual efforts on the night, which revealed very clearly that 2 of their worst under performers were the only 2 home grown starting players in the team. Both aging disgracefully now, and, given that they are 36/37, it doesn’t speak very highly of the Old Trafford babes production line in the last 20 years. Step forward and take a farewell bow Messrs Scholes and Giggs as, on that showing, I would be very surprised to see either of you in a future Manchester derby. Still, they’ve got Cleverly and Anderson to come back (Oh, how we tremble at the thought!).

Anyhow, here’s a quick analysis of what was their best 11 on the night according to Slur Alex. I did an article after the previous derby, thanking him for putting out a team without any real spine, and I was utterly delighted to see him do the same again, but also to leave out Valencia – a player I thought could have caused us a few problems. However, the likelihood is that, on the night, they were so poor, he probably wouldn’t have made a difference even if introduced earlier.

In my opinion, the majority of that lot wouldn’t even have made our first 25. They were truly eclipsed on the night by the risen light of a blue moon over Manchester:-

De gea
One good save in the 2nd half when he got down well to Clichy’s shot. At fault on several corners before the goal, and at fault slightly on the goal itself. Any better than our second choice goalie? No

Jones
Got forward well and crossed dangerously once in the whole match. Suspect defensively; got himself booked and could have been sent off had he been rightly booked earlier, or for verbal abuse at the ref later which went unpunished.
Was it £16million for him? The next England Captain? Maybe, if Woy Hodgson’s blind! My goodness - all that money and still not the finished article. Any better than our 2nd choice right back? As, on the night, that was Richards – no chance.

Smalling
Sorry – had to stop laughing - £10 million was it? Distribution appaulling; positional sense – absent. As a centre half, worse than Jones and even worse than Johnny Evans. Turned himself into a complete laughing stock on the goal, and as he doesn’t look the most confident of lads, he’ll probably never recover. All that money and - again - not the finished article. Better than our 4th choice centre back? No – but it’s close, as that's Savic, which says it all really. At least we didn’t cough up £10m for Savic.

Ferdinand
Their leader, he would have us believe. Leader? Just look at the dreadful goatee and be inspired! I mean – what is that all about? Looked like a 3 year old had taken a crayon to his chin in some vain attempt to lighten his image. He needs it though because he looks old and drawn, and slow. Well past his best, and looks flaky alongside anyone but Vidic and very fortunate not to have been exposed more often throughout the season. Was the pick of their back 4, which isn’t saying much. Better than our Captain… err, no. Better than our third choice centre back, Kolo Toure? Err, probably not

Evra
Their captain. Was he inspirational? No. Was he any good. Err – that’s another no. His head is probably still spinning today after the run around he was given by Nasri and Zabaletta. He managed to get forward a couple of times but delivered nothing dangerous, and frankly – like several others – was a bit of a non entity. Better than our captain – no. Better than our second choice left back – Kolarov? No.

Carrick
The man with the killer pass – not! The press bemoan us paying over the odds for players, often holding up Gareth Barry as an example. United paid £18-20m for Carrick years ago; we paid £12m for Barry. Would we swap Barry? No chance!
Back to Carrick - laborious on the night and frequently made to look pedestrian and out of his depth. Better than our reserve midielders – eg Milner? No.

Scholes
Pretty much as above. Get that pension book out again Paul to save yourself from embarrassment next season, but thanks for the entertainment when you squared up to Yaya’s knee.

Park
What a masterstroke by Fergie – a player not seen for about 10 games; no match practice; no United fans having a decent word to say about him, so, in he comes to save the day – the bus driver - in charge of parking it, perhaps? Almost drowned, he was so out of his depth, and the lifeguards rescued him in less than an hour. Will probably never be seen again. Better than any of our tea ladies? Probably not..

Nani
When you need someone to man up, who do you go for? Well I guess Fergie had been on the chemic or listening to Thriller on his Ipod when he was picking the team, as he went for everyone’s favourite Michael Jackson lookalike. And, Nani didn’t let him down did he – he was ‘Bad.’ Very bad. But, near the end, he got angry, then he was funny! Was indecisive, flitting from one wing to the other, as if he couldn’t decide which of our full back’s pockets he preferred to occupy What must Valencia have been thinking? What must Fergie have been thinking? Better than any of our forwards? No.

Giggs
Mr Reliable. Remember the song - ‘ Giggs! Giggs will tear you apart, again..’ Err, no he won’t – ever again! A shadow of the shadow of his former self. Anonymous. Fergie went for his tried and trusted men, and Giggs – his number 1 – failed him miserably. Time to join Scolesey in the pension queue Ryan. So, best to make that a complete new midfield quartet for next season Slur Alex. ( Mind you, they have got Cleverly to come back – another future England captain [ Yawns!!].)
Better than any of our midfielders – once upon a time that would have been a resounding ‘Yes’, but, a resounding ‘No’ on that pathetic non-performance.

Rooney
Back to his best; his South African World Cup best, that is. Kicked Kompany early on; stayed on the ground moaning until the ref booked Kompany; tried to goad our leader into another hasty tackle or 2 to get him sent off, but failed to do anything other than inspire Vinnie to truly greater deeds. I know Kompany won’t admit to this but, I reckon he absolutely hates Rooney. I do. He’s a snarling shithouse of the worst order. A cheating foul mouthed bully who is managing to get away with murder because the ref’s are scared of him -and Fergie. He hasn’t been booked all season, you know! This is the thug who booted an opponent from behind whilst playing for his country and the FA pulled out all the stops to get his ban reduced. He’s seemed to have FA protection ever since.
What cannot be denied is that he got Kompany booked wrongly, and he tried to influence the ref constantly throughout the match. He also quite clearly called the ref a ‘fuckin’twat’, as captured on Sky TV live, and later as clearly as anything on Match of The Day. He looked to be in a pretty foul mood by the end of the game, possibly because he was frustrated at the fact that he was absolutely useless. He barely put a pass to a team-mate’s feet ( How many of his passes went straight out of play?), had zero attempts on goal, but at least shares with us an abiding memory of seeing Vinnie power-in the winning goal from his vantage point in his own 6 yard box, having decided to occupy a rear seat on the team bus. Oh – how that must have hurt – Kompany should have been off by then - if only his plan hadn’t gone awry.
Better than any of our 4 forwards? No. On this particular night, his control made Dzeko look like Zidane.

Ah well, we look forward to next season. We might not win the league yet, but, stuffing that lot in 2 derbies, and making them look like a bunch of amateurs, and seeing that lovely blue moon rise not just over Manchester but across the globe – that’s priceless.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.