Hughes OUT

[leewill31]

I believe City should at least be finishing 3rd with players they have signed and the money they have spent. Baring in mind Chelsea were 2nd in their first season if expenditure, 1st in their second year. City should be able to achieve something similar.

Chelsea began from a much higher level than we were at when we came into the money, so I'm not sure that's a valid comparison.

some see chelsea as a mirror 2 us but what some should remember is that roman has spent nearly 700 million in 6 years for them to be were they are,so when you compare our 200 million its very small in comparison.

 

[fulhamroad22]

Chelsea began from a much higher level than we were at when we came into the money, so I'm not sure that's a valid comparison.

some see chelsea as a mirror 2 us but what some should remember is that roman has spent nearly 700 million in 6 years for them to be were they are,so when you compare our 200 million its very small in comparison.

We spent a lot less than that on transfers. I count this as City's first real year in the top as a rich team. Chelsea's first year transfer expenditure from both windows came to £110 Million and we finished 2nd. City have spent in excess of £200 Million in their first year and I think the £80 Million+ difference in expenditure fully makes up for the difference between City and Chelsea pre-investment.

I really think City need to be 3rd at the very least.

 

[sniff]

some see chelsea as a mirror 2 us but what some should remember is that roman has spent nearly 700 million in 6 years for them to be were they are,so when you compare our 200 million its very small in comparison.

We spent a lot less than that on transfers. I count this as City's first real year in the top as a rich team. Chelsea's first year transfer expenditure from both windows came to £110 Million and we finished 2nd. City have spent in excess of £200 Million in their first year and I think the £80 Million+ difference in expenditure fully makes up for the difference between City and Chelsea pre-investment.

I really think City need to be 3rd at the very least.

but it still isnt taking into account the distortion in the transfer market, player prices have gone through the roof since Chelsea started their spending spree.

Joe Cole cost £6m when you lot started out in the market, name on top rated English youngster you could get for that money now ???

 

[JoshuaJDuckworth]

Have resisted for so long to post on this (or any thread) but felt I had to add something.

I do not dispute that Mourinhio (speeling?) is a really good manager. I mean he won a lot for Chelsea and appears like he is going to do pretty well at Inter. What gets to me is the comments from people that say it is not the results that get to them but the idea that we play negative long ball football so should sack Hughes and get someone like Mourinhio.
Do you actually remember watching Chelsea under Jose? They played very negative football. Get one goal and then shut up shop. They were not a good team to watch, in fact they were the opposite of what a lot of people are calling for. Fine think Mourinhio is a good manager but do not complain about our style of play and then say Mourinhio would change this.

Think of how much better Ashley Cole has been as an attacking player since Jose left? And the example of SWP who never secured his place but Jose wanted a different role from him than an attacking winger.

Some people have very short memories. What is it results or style of play?

If it is results then we are currently doing pretty well compared to previous seasons (forget how much we spent, all of the prices were hugely inflated because of our wealth) and are in a strong position.

If it is style of play then Mourinhio is not the answer and if you actually looked at some of the stuff we are doing, without deciding that you hate the manager and then trying to justify it, then most of it is very good. Yeah some of our play is not great but a lot is. Any way it could be worse, we could have not scored at home for 5 months!

How short are your memories?

Rant over,
Sorry 'bout that.

 

[Rammy Blue]

Have resisted for so long to post on this (or any thread) but felt I had to add something.

I do not dispute that Mourinhio (speeling?) is a really good manager. I mean he won a lot for Chelsea and appears like he is going to do pretty well at Inter. What gets to me is the comments from people that say it is not the results that get to them but the idea that we play negative long ball football so should sack Hughes and get someone like Mourinhio.
Do you actually remember watching Chelsea under Jose? They played very negative football. Get one goal and then shut up shop. They were not a good team to watch, in fact they were the opposite of what a lot of people are calling for. Fine think Mourinhio is a good manager but do not complain about our style of play and then say Mourinhio would change this.

Think of how much better Ashley Cole has been as an attacking player since Jose left? And the example of SWP who never secured his place but Jose wanted a different role from him than an attacking winger.

Some people have very short memories. What is it results or style of play?

If it is results then we are currently doing pretty well compared to previous seasons (forget how much we spent, all of the prices were hugely inflated because of our wealth) and are in a strong position.

If it is style of play then Mourinhio is not the answer and if you actually looked at some of the stuff we are doing, without deciding that you hate the manager and then trying to justify it, then most of it is very good. Yeah some of our play is not great but a lot is. Any way it could be worse, we could have not scored at home for 5 months!

How short are your memories?

Rant over,
Sorry 'bout that.

shouldn't have wasted your time; lots of people have posted stats about Jose's record proving your argument is garbage as he averages more like 3 goals a game, as he does at Inter this season as well.

 

[the plasterer]

Have resisted for so long to post on this (or any thread) but felt I had to add something.

I do not dispute that Mourinhio (speeling?) is a really good manager. I mean he won a lot for Chelsea and appears like he is going to do pretty well at Inter. What gets to me is the comments from people that say it is not the results that get to them but the idea that we play negative long ball football so should sack Hughes and get someone like Mourinhio.
Do you actually remember watching Chelsea under Jose? They played very negative football. Get one goal and then shut up shop. They were not a good team to watch, in fact they were the opposite of what a lot of people are calling for. Fine think Mourinhio is a good manager but do not complain about our style of play and then say Mourinhio would change this.

Think of how much better Ashley Cole has been as an attacking player since Jose left? And the example of SWP who never secured his place but Jose wanted a different role from him than an attacking winger.

Some people have very short memories. What is it results or style of play?

If it is results then we are currently doing pretty well compared to previous seasons (forget how much we spent, all of the prices were hugely inflated because of our wealth) and are in a strong position.

If it is style of play then Mourinhio is not the answer and if you actually looked at some of the stuff we are doing, without deciding that you hate the manager and then trying to justify it, then most of it is very good. Yeah some of our play is not great but a lot is. Any way it could be worse, we could have not scored at home for 5 months!

How short are your memories?

Rant over,
Sorry 'bout that.

nice rant fellow blue, good to get it off your chest!

 

[Damocles]

That's a common myth. Mourinho's teams quite often won heavily, yet the media persisted with this myth and it seems to have entered the public domain. Actually look up his results, and you will see what I mean.

Anyway, we aren't good enough to pick and choose in which way we would like to win, just winning is nice. If we ever turn in to a club where the fans want a manager sacked because he plays boring, yet successful football, I will take off my City shirt, resign as an admin here, throw my seasoncard in a fire and remove City from my life. I'd be done.

 

[Damocles]

That's a common myth. Mourinho's teams quite often won heavily, yet the media persisted with this myth and it seems to have entered the public domain. Actually look up his results, and you will see what I mean.

Anyway, we aren't good enough to pick and choose in which way we would like to win, just winning is nice. If we ever turn in to a club where the fans want a manager sacked because he plays boring, yet successful football, I will take off my City shirt, resign as an admin here, throw my seasoncard in a fire and remove City from my life. I'd be done.

 

[blueinsa]

Have resisted for so long to post on this (or any thread) but felt I had to add something.

I do not dispute that Mourinhio (speeling?) is a really good manager. I mean he won a lot for Chelsea and appears like he is going to do pretty well at Inter. What gets to me is the comments from people that say it is not the results that get to them but the idea that we play negative long ball football so should sack Hughes and get someone like Mourinhio.
Do you actually remember watching Chelsea under Jose? They played very negative football. Get one goal and then shut up shop. They were not a good team to watch, in fact they were the opposite of what a lot of people are calling for. Fine think Mourinhio is a good manager but do not complain about our style of play and then say Mourinhio would change this.

Think of how much better Ashley Cole has been as an attacking player since Jose left? And the example of SWP who never secured his place but Jose wanted a different role from him than an attacking winger.

Some people have very short memories. What is it results or style of play?

If it is results then we are currently doing pretty well compared to previous seasons (forget how much we spent, all of the prices were hugely inflated because of our wealth) and are in a strong position.

If it is style of play then Mourinhio is not the answer and if you actually looked at some of the stuff we are doing, without deciding that you hate the manager and then trying to justify it, then most of it is very good. Yeah some of our play is not great but a lot is. Any way it could be worse, we could have not scored at home for 5 months!

How short are your memories?

Rant over,
Sorry 'bout that.

shouldn't have wasted your time; lots of people have posted stats about Jose's record proving your argument is garbage as he averages more like 3 goals a game, as he does at Inter this season as well.

His teams are consistently the highest scoring and least conceding, yet some think it's boring?

Unbelievable!

 

[ZanteWeatherman]

Utter nonsense all this. I live in Greece now and they sack managers for being 2nd in the "Superleague" ha ha. Get over it, we are doing fine right now.