Pep only here 3 years?

Part of me likes to think that this is finally the job where he'll settle down for more than the usual 3 year stretch and fall in love with the club as Aguero, Silva, Kompany and Zabaleta have but that's more wishful thinking than anything else.
It's a time to enjoy though, I know that much. Seeing first hand what the man can do after only watching from afar is mouthwatering. Hearing the praise he gets from fellow players and managers blows me away. It seems pretty much everyone is in agreement that his football philosophy is unmatched and the time and effort he puts into preparation is off the scale. Along with the pull he has it really is a fantastic time to be a City fan.
 
I think Pep's plan right now will be 3 years then do 1.

But if he becomes a City fan, that may change. All down to how he & his family settle & how much enjoyment he gets & how much emotional intensity he uses up in the job I imagine.

But right now, I doubt he has any intention of staying after 3 years.
 
He could stay longer than the typical 3 year stretch he subscribes due mainly to Txiki et al. Depends on a number of factors although Pep is an idealist and I suspect he will look for another challenge (Perhaps a NT) before returning to Barcelona in some capacity down the line
 
Free press does not exist, that utopia has been gone for some time.... however you do make a valid point about the link.

Thanks mate. I understand your point about a free press, every publication and media outlet has their own agenda to suit their own needs. However, while there is still so much competition in the press, the truth still manages to squueze out, and people are still held to account.

If all of the less viewed papers disappeared we'd be left with the Daily Mail and The Sun, which are the two biggest papers in circulation by far. I don't want to live in a world where they are the only two news outlets available to the country. And if they both had their way, the BBC wouldn't even exist as a news service, a scary thought.

We all have our own preferences for news, and my personal view is that although I might not agree with the Mail, sometimes might not agree with the Mirror, Telegraph, Guardian, whatever, it's important for society and for debate that they all exist and all offer an alternative view.

That's why I think it's right to provide links on here to whichever paper has a City related story, it's better for the country if there are multiple outlets for news, whether you agree with their political commentary or not.
 
The Mirror are never wrong, and they never ever do anything for just clickbait. They are a well respected Newspaper and we should all be worried about this. They know what theyre talking about and are never wrong when predicting future.
 
Part of me likes to think that this is finally the job where he'll settle down for more than the usual 3 year stretch and fall in love with the club as Aguero, Silva, Kompany and Zabaleta have but that's more wishful thinking than anything else.
It's a time to enjoy though, I know that much. Seeing first hand what the man can do after only watching from afar is mouthwatering. Hearing the praise he gets from fellow players and managers blows me away. It seems pretty much everyone is in agreement that his football philosophy is unmatched and the time and effort he puts into preparation is off the scale. Along with the pull he has it really is a fantastic time to be a City fan.

There's huge rumours that he's desperate for the Brazil job for Qatar 2022. I think Soriano wants us to work in cycles and by then, a new Pep may be on the horizon.
 
The Mirror are never wrong, and they never ever do anything for just clickbait. They are a well respected Newspaper and we should all be worried about this. They know what theyre talking about and are never wrong when predicting future.

In fairness, Pep has gone on record a few times to say that he finds the prospect of staying at one club for a long time to be "boring" and that he doesn't plan on staying at clubs beyond 3 years. He's also hinted he could retire early (as in, very early). So all this is hardly beyond the realms of belief.
 
If you hope all of the national press go bust, what do you think will fill the vacuum it leaves? There will be some very rich people / companies / government bodies with their own agenda who will be dictating the news cycle.

The system we have now of a free press is absolutely essential to democracy. As much as the tabloid press publish some utter click-baiting shite, at least there is competition. A free press means people will be held to account, the truth will out.

Take Murdoch who's the biggest media mogul in the country. If he controlled all of the press, the News of the World hacking scandal would never have come out. He could carry on doing as he pleased, invading people's lives, liberties, and even if he got caught, there would be no alternative press that would report on it.

I'm proud to live in a democratic country, and one of the corner stones of a democracy is a free press. They aren't perfect, but they play an incredibly important role in society. The idea that if all the national papers went bust that some plucky volunteers would research and publish all of the news for us on Twitter is just an absolute fallacy. How would those people survive and make a living, and how could we trust that they were telling the truth if they were not accountable to anyone?

Music is rather different. The cost of producing and marketing music has come down ten fold in the last 20 years. Music can be produced to recordable standard now in a bedroom with £2k worth of equipment. 25 years ago it might cost £2k a hour to work in a studio with comparable technology. Bands can now launch themselves on social media and get millions of plays / views for their songs for absolutely nothing. Again 25 years ago that exposure would cost hundreds of thousands of pounds in marketing, video production etc.

Many people get music for free now, so artists aren't getting the same income from record sales. But songwriters are still getting paid comparable amounts for publishing when their music is used on radio, TV etc, and live gigs have never been more popular, with more people attending music events now than ever before, and prices going up to reflect it. So with music, yes sales are down, but the cost of producing and marketing music has also fallen dramatically, and the live aspect is doing very well.

Journalism is a completely different industry. Newspaper sales are in terminal decline, people are becoming more savvy online using adblockers etc, so even advertising revenues aren't picking up the slack. Music and art plays an important role in society, but it's essentially entertainment. Whether record labels exist in ten years, or whether musicians become millionaires, is debatable, but new music will always be produced regardless.

If national newspapers cease to exist, the ramifications for democratic society are a lot more stark than if the record labels go bust.

We don't have a free press but the apparency of one.

The same as we don't have a democracy but the apparency of one.

For instance did you vote to invade a country solely to support the USA's empire in the oil producing Middle East? This is exactly what this country did.

Have you voted to have young kids drugged with anti psychotics in the name of medicine? Think about it. A kid gets bored with school so rebels a bit. This becomes an excuse to drug him with a chemical straitjacket that can produce suicidal impulses. Because he is "mentally ill".

The press is a managed entity that prints lies for the sake of controversy.

1984 by George Orwell was pretty much spot on as a prediction. The world is not there yet but it's being worked towards by our "democratic" masters.
 

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.