De Bruyne?

No, he wanted to extend but Bayern said no. They didnt want to pay him a Pay Raise, because his Performances and Injuries wasnt justifying it.

Ah ok... Still a class player though when fit and a household name. Not quite what he was about 2-3 seasons ago.
 
No, he wouldn't have signed for us.

Chelsea won the UCL, he opted to join them, if it were just about cash, he'd have joined us before the final was played.

We didn't offer the cash though, that's the problem. Chelsea paid his agent millions and instead Marwood was too busy dicking about buying homegrown players who were not even good enough for our bench. Chelsea knew they needed a big signing to get back within the top 2 in the league and Hazard was their man.

I personally think he would have been ours if we would have paid more than Chelsea. More stability at the time, better manager and a better side at the time too.
 
Didn't Bayern offer Schweinsteiger a new contract? Wouldn't say he is 2nd rate at all. Can't judge Depay just yet either. Same could be said for Delph as well, nobody else wanted him.

Yeah the scum offered a package that bayern wasn't going to compete with, Delph wise only us chelsea and Arsenal could buy him for 8m for that fee was a no-brainer, we have improved as a team for me the scum havent they've gone backwards! They are a joke of a club with 60m players taking the piss other players using them!
 
Yeah the scum offered a package that bayern wasn't going to compete with, Delph wise only us chelsea and Arsenal could buy him for 8m for that fee was a no-brainer, we have improved as a team for me the scum havent they've gone backwards! They are a joke of a club with 60m players taking the piss other players using them!

Yeah, If they lose De Gea and Di Maria I think they will be sending out the wrong kind of message.

Still think Schweinsteiger for the price will prove a shrewd signing. Would have had him at City if he was 2-3 years younger.
 
We didn't offer the cash though, that's the problem. Chelsea paid his agent millions and instead Marwood was too busy dicking about buying homegrown players who were not even good enough for our bench. Chelsea knew they needed a big signing to get back within the top 2 in the league and Hazard was their man.

I personally think he would have been ours if we would have paid more than Chelsea. More stability at the time, better manager and a better side at the time too.

Fucking marwood again.Even though Mancini freely admits to wanting those players, people insist it was Marwood. He admits it time & again. Sure, he wanted Hazard & an old crock & they didn't come, but nobody forced him to sign the others. He chose to spend the money.
 
Fucking marwood again.Even though Mancini freely admits to wanting those players, people insist it was Marwood. He admits it time & again. Sure, he wanted Hazard & an old crock & they didn't come, but nobody forced him to sign the others. He chose to spend the money.

I can guarentee that Mancini didn't want Rodwell and Sinclair. You could see the look in his eyes when he was being interviewed about the signing of Rodwell, you could sense the anger and disappointment, he didn't want them... He was told by Marwood and the powers that be that we had to buy homegrown. Mancini is a very ambitious man, no way did he want to settle for Sinclair and Rodwell, NOT A CHANCE. He was left to rage all season at the club not backing up his transfer targets.

Give me one reason why Mancini would want Sinclair? He's not Brendan fecking Rodgers!
 

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.