Media thread 2022/23

Status
Not open for further replies.
I find it strange that there are no wage estimates on any Messi articles I’ve seen him going to Miami.

We know he likes to get the best deal so it must be comparable to Saudi but why no mention. All I’ve seen is US companies like Apple etc will sponsor but it’s really strange.

It’s almost like the downplaying of Mccallister to Dippers with no agent fees or his salary included.
 
cheekybids said:
The Walker transfer makes no sense whatsoever, we know Sterling transfer had add ons but they aren’t specified. With Walker you’d imagine if it was all above board it would be placed below transfer without add ons I.e below Sterling.
Click to expand...
Sterling was £42m + a potential £7m, with Liverpool receiving £34m of the initial fee as there was a sell on clause from QPR
 
I don’t get the narrative that the PL is weaker now than when Utd dominated. Can anyone explain this to me? Because…

In the last 5 years English teams performances in Europe have probably been stronger than ever before. You’ve had:

Liverpool - 3 UCL finals
City - 2 UCL finals
Chelsea - 1 UCL final and 1 EL final
Spurs - 1 UCL final
Arsenal - 1 EL final
West Ham - 1 ECL final

The PL has more financial clout than ever before, in the last 5 years you’ve got some serious NET spending (yeah let’s use that one against them now):

Chelsea - £654 M
Utd - £540 M
Arsenal - £485 M
West Ham - £356 M
Newcastle - £351 M

Note - City are 10th with £224 M, behind Spurs, Wolves, Villa and Liverpool.

In comparison to Utd dominated periods, I’m not even going to bother putting anything together, in the 90’s and early 00’s they were the only ones spending consistently big money. Then Chelsea came along to join them, and then Liverpool started spending big too. Now nearly every team in the PL are buying top players from other leagues.

Then, think about how many times have we had to go on crazy winning streaks to see off Liverpool and this season Arsenal? Win streaks against a lot of expensively assembled teams (even with inflation adjustments). We have had to amass some of the highest points totals ever, in era where most teams could’ve afforded the majority of our players. Look at Utd’s 99 winning season. Forget the class of 92 kids, they had 4 of the worlds most expensive buys too and they drew 12 games that season. The last time we drew 12 games we finished 4th. Their points total would’ve seen them finish, just about in 3rd place this season. So how can anyone say the league was harder when they could afford so many slip ups?
 
Last edited:
For a decade and more, Manchester City have been subjected to scrutiny, derision and sensationalist hysteria by swathes of the media.

Certain figures have pinned their careers to the mast of the good ship 'Let’s Hobble Citeh'. Others have regularly been happy to be able seahands or provided ample amounts of hot wind to blow that ship harder.

It has been, according to Khaldoon, a clear and organised [smear] campaign. Most of us City fans have decried the club's seeming lack of ambition in meeting this campaign head on. Fight fire with fire, so to speak.

This week, Forbes have declared that Manchester City is the most valuable brand in world football. The u/18s and u/21s have each completed three league wins in a row and the First Team is only on the verge of becoming arguably the greatest side in the history of English football.

It would appear then, that we City fans have been wrong in our calls for City to start banning journalists and issuing lawsuits. The impact of those jaundiced observers has been minimal upon the progression of our club's own good ship.

The club has chosen its battles (CAS ad now the PL charges). There is no reason to believe it will win every time but equally nothing in past experience to encourage one to presume it won't emerge victorious either.

And, if we City fans were wrong, what of the chasing Fleet Street armada?
Perhaps, they are beginning to realise that if a man buys an asset for £200k , converts it into an entity worth £4.5bn and makes it the most enviable brand in world football along the way, that maybe it isn't all about this made-up vaguely pejorative term of "sportswashing". Maybe it's something else? Maybe it's capitalism?

And our lot are the best at that too.
 
Last edited:
Benzino said:
I don’t get the narrative that the PL is weaker now than when Utd dominated. Can anyone explain this to me? Because…

In the last 5 years English teams performances in Europe have probably been stronger than ever before. You’ve had:

Liverpool - 3 UCL finals
City - 2 UCL finals
Chelsea - 1 UCL final and 1 EL final
Spurs - 1 UCL final
Arsenal - 1 EL final
West Ham - 1 ECL final

The PL has more financial clout than ever before, in the last 5 years you’ve got some serious NET spending (yeah let’s use that one against them now):

Chelsea - £654 M
Utd - £540 M
Arsenal - £485 M
West Ham - £356 M
Newcastle - £351 M

Note - City are 10th with £224 M, behind Spurs, Wolves, Villa and Liverpool.

In comparison to Utd dominated periods, I’m not even going to bother putting anything together, in the 90’s and early 00’s they were the only ones spending consistently big money. Then Chelsea came along to join them, and then Liverpool started spending big too. Now nearly every team in the PL are buying top players from other leagues.

Then, think about how many times have we had to go on crazy winning streaks to see off Liverpool and this season Arsenal? Win streaks against a lot of expensively assembled teams (even with inflation adjustments). We have had to amass some of the highest points totals ever, in era where most teams could’ve afforded the majority of our players. Look at Utd’s 99 winning season. Forget the class of 92 kids, they had 4 of the worlds most expensive buys too and they drew 12 games that season. The last time we drew 12 games we finished 4th. Their points total would’ve seen them finish, just about in 3rd place this season. So how can anyone say the league was harder when they could afford so many slip ups?
Click to expand...

The notion that this PL is somehow easier to win is frankly idiotic. Ferguson had by far the biggest budget and very little competition. Wenger was lauded here because he scrapped fish n chips before the game and brought in some very good players who followed very strict diet regimes m, didn’t drink and played against a load of piss cans.

Look at the managers and budgets Ferguson played against and contrast with Pep today.

Howard Wilkinson, Mike Walker, David O’leary and Brian Little were his biggest rivals.
Pep manages against the very best in the business..
 
Benzino said:
I don’t get the narrative that the PL is weaker now than when Utd dominated. Can anyone explain this to me? Because…

In the last 5 years English teams performances in Europe have probably been stronger than ever before. You’ve had:

Liverpool - 3 UCL finals
City - 2 UCL finals
Chelsea - 1 UCL final and 1 EL final
Spurs - 1 UCL final
Arsenal - 1 EL final
West Ham - 1 ECL final

The PL has more financial clout than ever before, in the last 5 years you’ve got some serious NET spending (yeah let’s use that one against them now):

Chelsea - £654 M
Utd - £540 M
Arsenal - £485 M
West Ham - £356 M
Newcastle - £351 M

Note - City are 10th with £224 M, behind Spurs, Wolves, Villa and Liverpool.

In comparison to Utd dominated periods, I’m not even going to bother putting anything together, in the 90’s and early 00’s they were the only ones spending consistently big money. Then Chelsea came along to join them, and then Liverpool started spending big too. Now nearly every team in the PL are buying top players from other leagues.

Then, think about how many times have we had to go on crazy winning streaks to see off Liverpool and this season Arsenal? Win streaks against a lot of expensively assembled teams (even with inflation adjustments). We have had to amass some of the highest points totals ever, in era where most teams could’ve afforded the majority of our players. Look at Utd’s 99 winning season. Forget the class of 92 kids, they had 4 of the worlds most expensive buys too and they drew 12 games that season. The last time we drew 12 games we finished 4th. Their points total would’ve seen them finish, just about in 3rd place this season. So how can anyone say the league was harder when they could afford so many slip ups?
Click to expand...
Totally agree. How can people say the PL was harder when United were winning? This statement suits the pro United narrative, but its not backed up with the facts. The key point that tells me it is more competitive now is because United used to say the season starts in January/February. It is now the case that you need to get off to a good start in the first 13 games to win the league. I rest my case.
 
Bez said:
Totally agree. How can people say the PL was harder when United were winning? This statement suits the pro United narrative, but its not backed up with the facts. The key point that tells me it is more competitive now is because United used to say the season starts in January/February. It is now the case that you need to get off to a good start in the first 13 games to win the league. I rest my case.
Click to expand...
Fuck, em all, if they want to cling to the past let them I,d much rather have the here and now. It's like comparing Netflix with Blockuster, there really is no comparison, the world moves on. Happily there appears no stopping City’s growth on the horizon, we just have to enjoy it while we can, meanwhile the rest of the football world is best summed up in this -

download.jpeg-8.jpg
 
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.