HUGHES MUST SAY NO TO KAKA

First Paul Parker, now this. It's really pathetic. It seems there is only one model, the "slow and steady model", and the only example they can ever use to show how the opposite will not work...is Real Madrid. The only fucking reason United or anyone else did it their way, is they did not have the money to go out and buy all the players they wanted at one time (and they didn't quite know what they wanted), whether those players were superstars or otherwise. If you have a manager, any manager, who has an idea in his head of his ideal 11 (why assume they will all be number one in the world in their respective positions?) and you have the money to get them all, what benefit is it to drag it out a number of years? The slow and steady model is a consequence of limited financing AND a fancy-name used to hide something all managers do all the time, which is fuck up in the transfer market by buying players who (for whatever reason) just don't work out. It's probable that any manager given the money and told to go out and buy his starting 11 from the off would make as many balls up as a manager who takes 3-5 years to construct his 11, is that any reason NOT to go for it? If City "went for it" and half of the players did not work out (in the sense of either simply being not up to it / not good team players), well, we can just go out and try again, and not have to worry about bank managers and overdrafts, stretching payments out / installments, selling to buy and all that.

Paul Parker, Tony Cascarino et al have no imagination. They cannot think outside of the box. They actually believe there is some immutable law of team construction, that there is only one way, and it must be followed. They also fail to see the bigger picture; that the signing of Kaka will be the catalyst to improving the team overall and encouraging other players to see us in a serious light. I would like to know what the reaction would be if we offered Jose Mourinho 500k per week to manage us, a 10m bonus if we qualify for the CL in his first year, a 25m bonus if we win the PL in his first two years and so on, and we offered Inter 100m in compensation if they'll release him immediately. What would they say? It is wrong? Destroying football? Evidence of cluelessness? How is that then? I must have missed the last two months where every stinking pundit praised the Arabs for sticking with Hughes, not knee-jerking him out of the door, giving him a chance, showing how they understood football is about a process and so on. Now the Arabs know nothing? Right. I could have sworn the Arabs were complimented on their commitment to the BEST academy in the country. Now they know nothing about football?

I am fucking sick to death of people sticking their oar in. They lectured us about Frank. They lectured us about Sven. They lectured us about sticking with Hughes (they couldn't give a rats arse whether we go down or not, so long as we have a "young, British, manager"...unlike Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea, Urinal...) and they're starting to take digs at the Arabs now FFS.

If you're reading this, and you're not a City fan, have the honesty to admit what we know anyway: you're a peevish, envious, hypocrite.
 
Brucie Bonus said:
First Paul Parker, now this. It's really pathetic. It seems there is only one model, the "slow and steady model", and the only example they can ever use to show how the opposite will not work...is Real Madrid. The only fucking reason United or anyone else did it their way, is they did not have the money to go out and buy all the players they wanted at one time (and they didn't quite know what they wanted), whether those players were superstars or otherwise. If you have a manager, any manager, who has an idea in his head of his ideal 11 (why assume they will all be number one in the world in their respective positions?) and you have the money to get them all, what benefit is it to drag it out a number of years? The slow and steady model is a consequence of limited financing AND a fancy-name used to hide something all managers do all the time, which is fuck up in the transfer market by buying players who (for whatever reason) just don't work out. It's probable that any manager given the money and told to go out and buy his starting 11 from the off would make as many balls up as a manager who takes 3-5 years to construct his 11, is that any reason NOT to go for it? If City "went for it" and half of the players did not work out (in the sense of either simply being not up to it / not good team players), well, we can just go out and try again, and not have to worry about bank managers and overdrafts, stretching payments out / installments, selling to buy and all that.

Paul Parker, Tony Cascarino et al have no imagination. They cannot think outside of the box. They actually believe there is some immutable law of team construction, that there is only one way, and it must be followed. They also fail to see the bigger picture; that the signing of Kaka will be the catalyst to improving the team overall and encouraging other players to see us in a serious light. I would like to know what the reaction would be if we offered Jose Mourinho 500k per week to manage us, a 10m bonus if we qualify for the CL in his first year, a 25m bonus if we win the PL in his first two years and so on, and we offered Inter 100m in compensation if they'll release him immediately. What would they say? It is wrong? Destroying football? Evidence of cluelessness? How is that then? I must have missed the last two months where every stinking pundit praised the Arabs for sticking with Hughes, not knee-jerking him out of the door, giving him a chance, showing how they understood football is about a process and so on. Now the Arabs know nothing? Right. I could have sworn the Arabs were complimented on their commitment to the BEST academy in the country. Now they know nothing about football?

I am fucking sick to death of people sticking their oar in. They lectured us about Frank. They lectured us about Sven. They lectured us about sticking with Hughes (they couldn't give a rats arse whether we go down or not, so long as we have a "young, British, manager"...unlike Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea, Urinal...) and they're starting to take digs at the Arabs now FFS.

If you're reading this, and you're not a City fan, have the honesty to admit what we know anyway: you're a peevish, envious, hypocrite.
that was worthy of a thread brucie :-)
 
Andy Townsend is the only non-bitter pundit I've heard so far. He said Kaka would be great for City, great for the game and he really hopes we pull it off. Now that is sensible.
 
He has a point.

You wouldn't see fergiscum forking out over £12m for an 18 year old. Oh sorry, I forgot about Ronaldo. But you wouldn't see che£$ki pay ushited £12m for an 18 year old who'd never even played for the rags. Buggers, I forgot about Jon Obi Wan Kenobi. But at least you wouldn't see Wenger pay £12m for a 17 year old. Shit, forgot about Theo Walcott.

Well at least you wouldn't see red scouse, the rags or the cockernee blues pay £120K per week for shit English players that get shown up for being average in every international tournament (when they actually qualify that is). Bollox, forgot about gerrard and lampard and all those other wankers.

maybe he doesn't have a point after all
 

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.