The Shrike said:So you will win your titles, and no doubt enjoy looking down on teams that you convince yourselves felt superior to you back in the day (which is wrong - many people used to have you as their 'second' team). But Chelsea's 'dream team' cannot fill a 42K seater stadium consistently, and their experience demonstrates that while your following may be increased by some plastics - respect and admiration are harder to come by.
bluemonkey71 said:The Shrike said:So you will win your titles, and no doubt enjoy looking down on teams that you convince yourselves felt superior to you back in the day (which is wrong - many people used to have you as their 'second' team). But Chelsea's 'dream team' cannot fill a 42K seater stadium consistently, and their experience demonstrates that while your following may be increased by some plastics - respect and admiration are harder to come by.
Oh no! Please don't pity us! Someone's 2nd team! We are not worthy!
I couldn't give a flying fuck about other teams and I never have. As has been said before noone gave us a second glance when we were not a threat. Times have changed. Do you honestly think we would be challenging without Mansour? Money makes the world go round.
Deal with it.
you're not debatingThe Shrike said:bluemonkey71 said:Oh no! Please don't pity us! Someone's 2nd team! We are not worthy!
I couldn't give a flying fuck about other teams and I never have. As has been said before noone gave us a second glance when we were not a threat. Times have changed. Do you honestly think we would be challenging without Mansour? Money makes the world go round.
Deal with it.
Dear oh dear. People didn't pity you - they empathised with the fact that you had proper fans who supported your club in huge numbers despite you being relegated through 2 divisions. Money makes the world go round - and also changes people for the worse. looks like its working its majic with you lot in double quick time.
And we are happy to deal with your new found wealth. Doesn't mean we can;t debate what it means.
squirtyflower said:you're not debatingThe Shrike said:Dear oh dear. People didn't pity you - they empathised with the fact that you had proper fans who supported your club in huge numbers despite you being relegated through 2 divisions. Money makes the world go round - and also changes people for the worse. looks like its working its majic with you lot in double quick time.
And we are happy to deal with your new found wealth. Doesn't mean we can;t debate what it means.
you're pontificating
although you do sound a lot like a mass debater
The Shrike said:Shhesh. You lot are becoming like plastic Chav fans - but in record time. As you'd expect - I know loads of Chav fans - and many old school fans are honest enough to admit that while they will take success at any price, they would rather that they could have achieved this without financial doping.
And that is the bottom line. You can compare what you are doing now with big clubs having financial clout in the past, but this just doesn't stack up. We are not talking about financial 'clout' in your case. We are talking a bottomless pit of money that can be spent heedlessly; without risk - players can be bought for record sums just to see if they will succeed, and then discarded at will. Comparing this to even the likes of Manure or Liverhoof in their pomp is ridiculous - and deep down most of you know it. And comparing your spending power to Arsenal's - are you serious?
Most fans aren't jealous, or envious of you. I prefer my club's relative lack of financial muscle to hoovering up every mercenary around - and it is great to have more 'big' games and an opportunity to pitch our organic team against your so-called 'dream team'.
And what you defensively characterise as lecturing is no such thing. What outsiders are asking, and rightly so, is whether the ability to spend so big; with a complete absense of any balancing factors, is good for the game. I'm not going to convince you that what you are doing is in a different stratosphere to what the so-called 'big four' (less the Chavs) were doing prior to 2009, but that doesn't mean that asking the question is invalid.
So you will win your titles, and no doubt enjoy looking down on teams that you convince yourselves felt superior to you back in the day (which is wrong - many people used to have you as their 'second' team). But Chelsea's 'dream team' cannot fill a 42K seater stadium consistently, and their experience demonstrates that while your following may be increased by some plastics - respect and admiration are harder to come by.
Skashion said:I would buy that other teams don't want to be in our position if not for the Liverpool fans being a good case study. Liverpool fans looking for a new owner, 'oh we don't want to be another City'. Rumours of a takeover backed by Chinese sovereign wealth fund and they were shouting from the rooftops on RAWK. As soon as it became apparent that wasn't happening back to, 'good, we didn't want to become another City'. Same with the rags over Rooney, and many on here in the opposite direction. Football fans are a fickle breed who are prepared to accept almost anything that will help their club be a success, including, strangely, not saying no to free money. I imagine if a prospective Sheikh Mansour took over Arsenal tomorrow promising to bring trophies and slash ticket prices in half, the vast vast majority would become giddy schoolgirls within a matter of seconds. The mere implication that you'd be any different suggests to me that you think you've got more morally upstanding fans than either us or Liverpool. I've seen no evidence of this whatsoever and without that evidence, you just look like a smug superior arrogant twunt.
M18CTID said:The Shrike said:Shhesh. You lot are becoming like plastic Chav fans - but in record time. As you'd expect - I know loads of Chav fans - and many old school fans are honest enough to admit that while they will take success at any price, they would rather that they could have achieved this without financial doping.
And that is the bottom line. You can compare what you are doing now with big clubs having financial clout in the past, but this just doesn't stack up. We are not talking about financial 'clout' in your case. We are talking a bottomless pit of money that can be spent heedlessly; without risk - players can be bought for record sums just to see if they will succeed, and then discarded at will. Comparing this to even the likes of Manure or Liverhoof in their pomp is ridiculous - and deep down most of you know it. And comparing your spending power to Arsenal's - are you serious?
Most fans aren't jealous, or envious of you. I prefer my club's relative lack of financial muscle to hoovering up every mercenary around - and it is great to have more 'big' games and an opportunity to pitch our organic team against your so-called 'dream team'.
And what you defensively characterise as lecturing is no such thing. What outsiders are asking, and rightly so, is whether the ability to spend so big; with a complete absense of any balancing factors, is good for the game. I'm not going to convince you that what you are doing is in a different stratosphere to what the so-called 'big four' (less the Chavs) were doing prior to 2009, but that doesn't mean that asking the question is invalid.
So you will win your titles, and no doubt enjoy looking down on teams that you convince yourselves felt superior to you back in the day (which is wrong - many people used to have you as their 'second' team). But Chelsea's 'dream team' cannot fill a 42K seater stadium consistently, and their experience demonstrates that while your following may be increased by some plastics - respect and admiration are harder to come by.
Anybody with half a brain cell would prefer to do it a different way, but the way football is structured these days it's impossible to do it the so-called "right way" and as such spending large sums of money is the only way of bridging the gap between mid-table and the top 4. The days of doing an Ipswich or a Derby or a Forest are long gone - unless you're bankrolled by a rich owner of course.
It wasn't City that created this situation so why we're getting the blame for "ruining football" is beyond me. The likes of UEFA are to blame for offering ridiculous sums of money to teams that play in the Champions League in an attempt to maintain the cosy status quo of the G14 clubs, while at the same time paying a pittance for those that compete in the Europa League. The imbalance between the two is nothing short of a joke.
Look at almost every big European club and you will find that at some point in their history they've benefitted from an injection of cash from a rich benefactor - I mean, how did Arsenal manage to bribe themselves a top-flight spot in 1919? It wasn't with fresh air was it? I'm not denying that City are doing it on a different scale to what has happened in the past, but ever since the sport became professional someone somewhere has been prepared to raise the bar in terms of spending on transfers and wages.
Anyway, if you weren't already aware, the Sheikh has a long-term plan for investment in the club and the city itself - if you think we're going to be spending £100 million-plus every transfer window then you're totally mistaken. In time, the area in and around Eastlands will be completely unrecognisable to what it is now. There will also be thousands of new jobs created in one of the most deprived inner-city areas of the country. Are you going to moan about that as well?
The Shrike said:squirtyflower said:you're not debating
you're pontificating
although you do sound a lot like a mass debater
lol - I see what you did there!
M18CTID said:The Shrike said:Shhesh. You lot are becoming like plastic Chav fans - but in record time. As you'd expect - I know loads of Chav fans - and many old school fans are honest enough to admit that while they will take success at any price, they would rather that they could have achieved this without financial doping.
And that is the bottom line. You can compare what you are doing now with big clubs having financial clout in the past, but this just doesn't stack up. We are not talking about financial 'clout' in your case. We are talking a bottomless pit of money that can be spent heedlessly; without risk - players can be bought for record sums just to see if they will succeed, and then discarded at will. Comparing this to even the likes of Manure or Liverhoof in their pomp is ridiculous - and deep down most of you know it. And comparing your spending power to Arsenal's - are you serious?
Most fans aren't jealous, or envious of you. I prefer my club's relative lack of financial muscle to hoovering up every mercenary around - and it is great to have more 'big' games and an opportunity to pitch our organic team against your so-called 'dream team'.
And what you defensively characterise as lecturing is no such thing. What outsiders are asking, and rightly so, is whether the ability to spend so big; with a complete absense of any balancing factors, is good for the game. I'm not going to convince you that what you are doing is in a different stratosphere to what the so-called 'big four' (less the Chavs) were doing prior to 2009, but that doesn't mean that asking the question is invalid.
So you will win your titles, and no doubt enjoy looking down on teams that you convince yourselves felt superior to you back in the day (which is wrong - many people used to have you as their 'second' team). But Chelsea's 'dream team' cannot fill a 42K seater stadium consistently, and their experience demonstrates that while your following may be increased by some plastics - respect and admiration are harder to come by.
Anybody with half a brain cell would prefer to do it a different way, but the way football is structured these days it's impossible to do it the so-called "right way" and as such spending large sums of money is the only way of bridging the gap between mid-table and the top 4. The days of doing an Ipswich or a Derby or a Forest are long gone - unless you're bankrolled by a rich owner of course.
It wasn't City that created this situation so why we're getting the blame for "ruining football" is beyond me. The likes of UEFA are to blame for offering ridiculous sums of money to teams that play in the Champions League in an attempt to maintain the cosy status quo of the G14 clubs, while at the same time paying a pittance for those that compete in the Europa League. The imbalance between the two is nothing short of a joke.
Look at almost every big European club and you will find that at some point in their history they've benefitted from an injection of cash from a rich benefactor - I mean, how did Arsenal manage to bribe themselves a top-flight spot in 1919? It wasn't with fresh air was it? I'm not denying that City are doing it on a different scale to what has happened in the past, but ever since the sport became professional someone somewhere has been prepared to raise the bar in terms of spending on transfers and wages.
Anyway, if you weren't already aware, the Sheikh has a long-term plan for investment in the club and the city itself - if you think we're going to be spending £100 million-plus every transfer window then you're totally mistaken. In time, the area in and around Eastlands will be completely unrecognisable to what it is now. There will also be thousands of new jobs created in one of the most deprived inner-city areas of the country. Are you going to moan about that as well?
-- Fri Oct 29, 2010 11:37 am --
Skashion said:I would buy that other teams don't want to be in our position if not for the Liverpool fans being a good case study. Liverpool fans looking for a new owner, 'oh we don't want to be another City'. Rumours of a takeover backed by Chinese sovereign wealth fund and they were shouting from the rooftops on RAWK. As soon as it became apparent that wasn't happening back to, 'good, we didn't want to become another City'. Same with the rags over Rooney, and many on here in the opposite direction. Football fans are a fickle breed who are prepared to accept almost anything that will help their club be a success, including, strangely, not saying no to free money. I imagine if a prospective Sheikh Mansour took over Arsenal tomorrow promising to bring trophies and slash ticket prices in half, the vast vast majority would become giddy schoolgirls within a matter of seconds. The mere implication that you'd be any different suggests to me that you think you've got more morally upstanding fans than either us or Liverpool. I've seen no evidence of this whatsoever and without that evidence, you just look like a smug superior arrogant twunt.
Exactly. It's easier to complain about this kind of thing when your own club is in a position of relative strength, and that's what Arsenal are at the moment. If however, they hadn't won anything for over 30 years, were on their arse financially and on the brink of administration, their fans would be singing a completely different tune. It reminds me of United in the late 1980's - apart from a few FA Cups, their glory days were well and truly in the past. As soon as stories of Edwards selling the club to Knighton surfaced many of them indulged in a mass circle-jerk because they thought Knighton was their sugar daddy and that he would put far more money into the club than Edwards ever did.
The Shrike said:Shhesh. You lot are becoming like plastic Chav fans - but in record time. As you'd expect - I know loads of Chav fans - and many old school fans are honest enough to admit that while they will take success at any price, they would rather that they could have achieved this without financial doping.
And that is the bottom line. You can compare what you are doing now with big clubs having financial clout in the past, but this just doesn't stack up. We are not talking about financial 'clout' in your case. We are talking a bottomless pit of money that can be spent heedlessly; without risk - players can be bought for record sums just to see if they will succeed, and then discarded at will. Comparing this to even the likes of Manure or Liverhoof in their pomp is ridiculous - and deep down most of you know it. And comparing your spending power to Arsenal's - are you serious?
Most fans aren't jealous, or envious of you. I prefer my club's relative lack of financial muscle to hoovering up every mercenary around - and it is great to have more 'big' games and an opportunity to pitch our organic team against your so-called 'dream team'.
And what you defensively characterise as lecturing is no such thing. What outsiders are asking, and rightly so, is whether the ability to spend so big; with a complete absense of any balancing factors, is good for the game. I'm not going to convince you that what you are doing is in a different stratosphere to what the so-called 'big four' (less the Chavs) were doing prior to 2009, but that doesn't mean that asking the question is invalid.
So you will win your titles, and no doubt enjoy looking down on teams that you convince yourselves felt superior to you back in the day (which is wrong - many people used to have you as their 'second' team). But Chelsea's 'dream team' cannot fill a 42K seater stadium consistently, and their experience demonstrates that while your following may be increased by some plastics - respect and admiration are harder to come by.