Media Thread - 2021/22

Status
Not open for further replies.
Absolutely, every million the rags or scousers spend on players is met with glee, no criticism no matter how high the fee, the media are wet with excitement. Contrast that to the anger of our pursuit of Kane and Grealish, the media in a rage, kicking stuff around the office, hitting their keyboards that bit harder whilst typing shite stories about evil City. Even Chelsea's 250m splurge last summer didn't bat any eyelids with our impartial press. We're a free hit for the cunts, has to change soon
 
Fordyboy46 said:
Absolutely, every million the rags or scousers spend on players is met with glee, no criticism no matter how high the fee, the media are wet with excitement. Contrast that to the anger of our pursuit of Kane and Grealish, the media in a rage, kicking stuff around the office, hitting their keyboards that bit harder whilst typing shite stories about evil City. Even Chelsea's 250m splurge last summer didn't bat any eyelids with our impartial press. We're a free hit for the cunts, has to change soon
Click to expand...
When the rags or dippers pay mega money for a player they're "strengthening their squad" or "making a statement". When City buy a player they're "ruining football".
 
laserblue said:
When the rags or dippers pay mega money for a player they're "strengthening their squad" or "making a statement". When City buy a player they're "ruining football".
Click to expand...
Pretty much. We have to play the long game here. Shit for the hear & now but fuck all we can actively do but ignore the bike and defend our club.
 
laserblue said:
When the rags or dippers pay mega money for a player they're "strengthening their squad" or "making a statement". When City buy a player they're "ruining football".
Click to expand...
Exactly - who's got the Allison Rudd clip from a particular installment of Sunday Supplement where she is caught completely off guard when Neil Ashton (yes, that Neil Ashton) asked to expand on what the difference is between City spending X millions on transfers and in this instance Real Madrid spending X millions on transfers?

Paraphrasing but she barely strung a sentence together but basically said that 'Real have always done it so it was ok'.

Yet another wonderful insight into the journalistic workings of the industry.........
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
Things are certainly moving in the right direction so you have a point. As an example, I've just googled "Manchester United" and got about 175m search results. I did the same using "Manchester City" and got 80m results. That latter number would probably have been a lot less a few years ago. SEO's measure these things much more scientifically and the story is that they are still significantly more popular than us but that might not be quite so true in 5 or 10 years.
Click to expand...

Not sure if this the right thread to post but I was searching an old thread and stumbled upon this old post from PB and tried the same experiment.

3 years later and the numbers are vastly different:

Manchester City 629,000,000 (9 digit)
Manchester United 574,000,000 (9 digit)

More popular are the Manchester abbreviate club names:
Man City 16,140,000,000 (11 digit)
Man Utd 16,750,00,000 (11 digit)

Others:
Barcelona 10,130,000,000 (11 digit)
Real Madrid 8,450,000,00 (10 digit)
Chelsea 6,540,000,000 (10 digit)
Liverpool 4,710,000,000 (10 digit)
Arsenal 462,000,000 (9 digit)
Juventus 209,000,000 ( 9digit)
Tottenham 207,000,000 (9 digit)


Not what this all means but certainly good or bad we are in the conscious of a shit load of people and with our raggy neigbours way ahead of anyone else.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
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.