NorthamptonBlue
Well-Known Member
Just read this from a random fan commenting on a City story in the Times. Thought it was worth sharing (I am assuming that as a reader comment, it doesn’t break any copyright laws):
The only team to have won the PL without being one of the top 3 spenders is Leicester City.
Man Utd were spending today's equivalent of £130m for Rooney (as a 19 year old!) and another £130m on defender, Rio Ferdinand in the space of a couple of years when they were dominant. Plenty of other Utd, Chelsea and Arsenal players are in the 'top 50 most expensive players in history' list.
If you're sceptical about these numbers look up football inflation.
The biggest spending team doesn't always win but the winners are always one of the richest teams.
Utd are still the richest by a large margin but haven't won the PL for 6 years now and Leicester remain the single exception in the last 25 years. They're unusual examples of great under- and over-achievement.
There are also plenty of examples from the pre-PL era where clubs would spend big and be dominant for a few years only to lose their advantage as their players grew older. The biggest revolution in England has been the creation of the PL and the UEFA CL and their deliberatly self-serving financial makeup which makes teams, once their in the cartel, so rich they can expand their period domination indefinately because they earn so much more money than the rest.
City have just joined the scheme, they didn't invent it.
The only team to have won the PL without being one of the top 3 spenders is Leicester City.
Man Utd were spending today's equivalent of £130m for Rooney (as a 19 year old!) and another £130m on defender, Rio Ferdinand in the space of a couple of years when they were dominant. Plenty of other Utd, Chelsea and Arsenal players are in the 'top 50 most expensive players in history' list.
If you're sceptical about these numbers look up football inflation.
The biggest spending team doesn't always win but the winners are always one of the richest teams.
Utd are still the richest by a large margin but haven't won the PL for 6 years now and Leicester remain the single exception in the last 25 years. They're unusual examples of great under- and over-achievement.
There are also plenty of examples from the pre-PL era where clubs would spend big and be dominant for a few years only to lose their advantage as their players grew older. The biggest revolution in England has been the creation of the PL and the UEFA CL and their deliberatly self-serving financial makeup which makes teams, once their in the cartel, so rich they can expand their period domination indefinately because they earn so much more money than the rest.
City have just joined the scheme, they didn't invent it.
