Football Leaks/Der Spiegel articles

AUSSIE RED said:
It's all nonsense isn't it? Liverpool always paid top dollar when they were dominating, United were out spending everyone for years after that, then Chelsea did, now it's City. Unless there are salary caps etc... It will always be the case. Next time it could be Spurs or Arsenal being bought out and then everyone will woman about them buying the league. That's how football works now, big spending gets big results.... Except United for the last 7 years cos they have bought some absolute stinkers!
FFP was never about rich clubs it was to stop clubs going under and it had worked to a degree in that regard. And that's where it should end. In the words of the lunatic, Donald Trump, fake news
Click to expand...

The naivety is strong.
 
AUSSIE RED said:
It's all nonsense isn't it? Liverpool always paid top dollar when they were dominating, United were out spending everyone for years after that, then Chelsea did, now it's City. Unless there are salary caps etc... It will always be the case. Next time it could be Spurs or Arsenal being bought out and then everyone will woman about them buying the league. That's how football works now, big spending gets big results.... Except United for the last 7 years cos they have bought some absolute stinkers!
FFP was never about rich clubs it was to stop clubs going under and it had worked to a degree in that regard. And that's where it should end. In the words of the lunatic, Donald Trump, fake news
Click to expand...


Having read this, it is no surprise that you are a dipper supporter .

Do you believe in unicorns too ?
 
AUSSIE RED said:
It's all nonsense isn't it? Liverpool always paid top dollar when they were dominating, United were out spending everyone for years after that, then Chelsea did, now it's City. Unless there are salary caps etc... It will always be the case. Next time it could be Spurs or Arsenal being bought out and then everyone will woman about them buying the league. That's how football works now, big spending gets big results.... Except United for the last 7 years cos they have bought some absolute stinkers!
FFP was never about rich clubs it was to stop clubs going under and it had worked to a degree in that regard. And that's where it should end. In the words of the lunatic, Donald Trump, fake news
Click to expand...
Be honest, it wasn't was it?
 
blueinsa said:
What they need to get their heads around and accept is the fact not only have we spent money, comparable to most other top sides, the big difference is we have spent it extremely well and i would like to point them all in the direction of their jibes at the beginning that money couldn't buy success.

It has, bucket loads of it.
Click to expand...
You wouldn't get very far taking that line with Liverpool, Spurs, Arsenal etc. Whilst we have been efficient we have spent a lot more than other Premier League clubs. The only club who comes close is Man Utd.

A 5 year comparison

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/premier-league/fuenfjahresvergleich/wettbewerb/GB1

The transfermarkt data does not take into account City's Premier League 2, or u-18s and it inflates our net spending (which for example is more or less flat this season), but it's a guide.

A 10 year comparison

https://www.goal.com/en/news/1862/p...-man-city-who-has-spent-more-money-since-2008

It depends what time period you take of course. If you were to allow for transfer inflation and reviewed Man Utd's spending under pre-Ferguson and during his era, I think it would be off the scale. They smashed more British transfer records than anyone else.

It would be natural now for City's transfer spending to subside somewhat.

We should also include the infrastructure spend as well.

Why be defensive about this and pretend we have not spent as much as people think? We are just playing catch-up after years in the wilderness and City have been profitable for some time so the up-front investment worked by normal business standards.
 
Marvin said:
You wouldn't get very far taking that line with Liverpool, Spurs, Arsenal etc. Whilst we have been efficient we have spent a lot more than other Premier League clubs. The only club who comes close is Man Utd.

A 5 year comparison

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/premier-league/fuenfjahresvergleich/wettbewerb/GB1

The transfermarkt data does not take into account City's Premier League 2, or u-18s and it inflates our net spending (which for example is more or less flat this season), but it's a guide.

A 10 year comparison

https://www.goal.com/en/news/1862/p...-man-city-who-has-spent-more-money-since-2008

It depends what time period you take of course. If you were to allow for transfer inflation and reviewed Man Utd's spending under pre-Ferguson and during his era, I think it would be off the scale. They smashed more British transfer records than anyone else.

It would be natural now for City's transfer spending to subside somewhat.

We should also include the infrastructure spend as well.

Why be defensive about this and pretend we have not spent as much as people think? We are just playing catch-up after years in the wilderness and City have been profitable for some time so the up-front investment worked by normal business standards.
Click to expand...

We started from a position of absolute weakness compared to them.

lets do it on 15/20/25 years shall we and see who spent what and when spending those amounts who won the most?

They can all fuck off Marvin.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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.