Media discussion - 2025/26

franksinatra said:
I’m not sure if you have read the article but it’s isn’t negative about signing Donnarumma either.
Click to expand...
I read the opening paragraph in which the signing of one of the world's best players for £25m was being portrayed as a negative sign of how bad things have got for Pep.

Of course the rest of the article was positive. Donna is a class keeper. That just makes the start of the report even weirder.
 
Last edited:
Blue_eyes said:
Would it surprise you to learn that the cartel clubs have been told to "spend now" as the rules will soon change.

A sort of pl insider trading, they wouldnt dare..............would they?
Click to expand...

Would be funny as fuck if that was the case but seven clubs vote against it and all this big spending bites them on the PSR arse :)
 
waspish said:
How they worked out that we have lost 315m? Are they adding the new stadium hotels stand
Click to expand...
Doesn’t make sense only thing I can think is it’s not including a lot of sales of youth players bit like Transfermarket.com where they are on a seperate page or perhaps more likely again like transfermarket.com the values of ins and outs are not right so for example let’s say Jack is worth 50 well we loan him so we lost 50 million
 
IrishBlueSince92 said:
He's right.
They've killed the title race stone dead tbh. No one will get near them.
Click to expand...
Oh come on. Wirtz looks light weight. Frimpong is a shite defender. And who’s to say Isak will fit in. This season might be a fruitless one for City. But I’ll accept that if it means we’re on it again by 2026/27 season. But don’t make out Liverpool are untouchable
 
jrb said:
Pep is looking unhappy and bemused again in his usual stock picture.

View attachment 168552

View attachment 168554

View attachment 168553

Not that I want to link it, but the stinking guff is via the link. Apologies.

2025 transfers: Liverpool most active in record-breaking market - CIES Football Observatory

The 511th CIES Football Observatory Weekly Post analyses the financial results of transfer operations carried out in 2025. In total, clubs around (...)
football-observatory.com football-observatory.com
Click to expand...
I love how they call Liverpool's spend ‘invested’, the different wording used between them violent bastards and City is beyond appalling.
 
Stockton Heath Blue said:
Because £500m is amortised over 5 years, and they’ve recouped a good chunk from sales.
Click to expand...
This is often rolled out as the excuse by the financially brain dead hacks, why they're not really spending anywhere near as much as the headline figure, at least per year.

However, it ignores the fact that it also means that this year they're also paying for the signings of the last four years - in addition to one fifth of this year's signings!

It all averages out over a five year period (I assumed that all signings average out at a five year contract, but they'll all average out over the long term whatever the contract lengths).
 
eastlandsblue said:
Oh come on. Wirtz looks light weight. Frimpong is a shite defender. And who’s to say Isak will fit in.
Click to expand...
Ah but you're ignoring the "electric atmosphere of Anfield on a Champions League evening" that will spur them to ever greater heights, and of course over there "It Means More" so that'll give them an extra 20% as well.
 
eastlandsblue said:
Oh come on. Wirtz looks light weight. Frimpong is a shite defender. And who’s to say Isak will fit in. This season might be a fruitless one for City. But I’ll accept that if it means we’re on it again by 2026/27 season. But don’t make out Liverpool are untouchable
Click to expand...
Exactly ! If someone said to me half way through last season a club were going to buy Isak for £125 mill, I would have thought this person had just got out of Rampton. He's looked ok for Newcastle, but come on, £125 mill ????????
Your spot on about Wirtz looking light weight, I thought exactly the same when City were linked with him.
If the scousers do win the title again, it won't be because they are world beaters, it will be lack of opposition. But so far this season the dippers look very average.
 
invisibleandalone said:
Exactly ! If someone said to me half way through last season a club were going to buy Isak for £125 mill, I would have thought this person had just got out of Rampton. He's looked ok for Newcastle, but come on, £125 mill ????????
Your spot on about Wirtz looking light weight, I thought exactly the same when City were linked with him.
If the scousers do win the title again, it won't be because they are world beaters, it will be lack of opposition. But so far this season the dippers look very average.
Click to expand...
100% all 3 games haven’t been convincing enough to make them clear favourites.
 
First page on my Twitter homepage. 2 accounts. IMO, both posting only to seek engagement. There's no news here, just opinion.

This kind of communication, so prevalent in the social media age, is feeding this polarised discourse of either agree or disagree, rather then genuine debate, IMO.


Just flicking through the current City squad and im finding it hard to find a "Vinny" or a "Zabba" amongst any of them, worried? Too right i am...

Khusanov, Gvardiol, Stones, Ake, Dias That’s the order. The latter is a slow liability.

I always wonder how City would have looked had these two never been sold? (picture of Palmer and Alvarez)
 
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