feedmpenzaandhewillscore
Well-Known Member
Veron? He cost a packet.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
United thread 2019/20
- Thread starter Ric
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Veron? He cost a packet.
Blueboy73
Well-Known Member
Yes, Veron too £28.1 million for an Ali G lookalike iirc.Veron? He cost a packet.
I didn't include him as the previous poster had already named him
Newman Noggs
Well-Known Member
Interesting that the writer claims that scum never paid more than £25 mill for a player until after 2013 when they signed "arms and elbows" from Everton. I was sure they signed a player in 2001 called Veron for the princely sum of £38 mill". and it escalated from then on ever upward.
Clever writing. It says after selling Ronaldo so narrows the relevant period down very considerably
Blueboy73
Well-Known Member
Didn't the Ronaldo money go in debt repayments for Uncle Malc?Clever writing. It says after selling Ronaldo so narrows the relevant period down very considerably
The Ronaldo money of 2009 is the equivalent of today's Coutinho money.
Maybe we can claim the Sane money as our transfer budget for the next few seasons using the same logic :))
bluetonium
Well-Known Member
It is very selective in favour of United. However even in that period we only brought in a few for over £25m and I think we can all agree most were well worth it - Dzeko, Aguero, Tevez possibly and Milner, and fernandinho.
We also signed some of this clubs best ever players in that period and after the takeover, for under the figure they mention, such as David Silva and Yaya.
In fact you could easily argue that some of our poorer signing were the cheaper ones, and we should in fact have invested more rather than settle for economic options. At the end of the day the fee doesn't dictate a players ability in every case, but it does give an indication of how they are valued by the market.
In this very selective period both Manchester teams won the league twice. However, how many of each squad was still there five years later? By which time city has won another two league titles and countless cups, compared to a relatively barren period for United.
Silva was still here, Aguero, fernandinho, Vinny if we're allowed to include such a 'cheap' signing. For United it's pitiful and shows how short termist their thinking was in recovering from the departure of the bacon faced one. Not bad players so much, just bad strategy. Berbarov, Tosic, Obertan, Bebe, Van Persie, Zaha
The only players still there at the start of this season were De Gea, out on loan Smalling and the face. All of whom are cited as being not good enough anymore, in contrast to our lot who are very much at the core of the team.
Then we get on to the current financial health of both clubs. One is very self sufficient and turning a profit despite investing continually and seeing that return success on the field. The other is something like $700m in debt and chasing the rainbow, turning corners every five games and again talking about investing record amounts to get back on top and end years of no notable success.
I think if the author of the article asked who had invested better, then the answer is obvious. Sometimes you get what you pay for.
Bless you if you read through all of that. Evidently it is much easier for the MEN author to just write an article about how city bought success so nobody else ever had a chance.
We also signed some of this clubs best ever players in that period and after the takeover, for under the figure they mention, such as David Silva and Yaya.
In fact you could easily argue that some of our poorer signing were the cheaper ones, and we should in fact have invested more rather than settle for economic options. At the end of the day the fee doesn't dictate a players ability in every case, but it does give an indication of how they are valued by the market.
In this very selective period both Manchester teams won the league twice. However, how many of each squad was still there five years later? By which time city has won another two league titles and countless cups, compared to a relatively barren period for United.
Silva was still here, Aguero, fernandinho, Vinny if we're allowed to include such a 'cheap' signing. For United it's pitiful and shows how short termist their thinking was in recovering from the departure of the bacon faced one. Not bad players so much, just bad strategy. Berbarov, Tosic, Obertan, Bebe, Van Persie, Zaha
The only players still there at the start of this season were De Gea, out on loan Smalling and the face. All of whom are cited as being not good enough anymore, in contrast to our lot who are very much at the core of the team.
Then we get on to the current financial health of both clubs. One is very self sufficient and turning a profit despite investing continually and seeing that return success on the field. The other is something like $700m in debt and chasing the rainbow, turning corners every five games and again talking about investing record amounts to get back on top and end years of no notable success.
I think if the author of the article asked who had invested better, then the answer is obvious. Sometimes you get what you pay for.
Bless you if you read through all of that. Evidently it is much easier for the MEN author to just write an article about how city bought success so nobody else ever had a chance.
Last edited:
Blueboy73
Well-Known Member
Best post of the day and sums it up perfectly.It is very selective in favour of United. However even in that period we only brought in a few for over £25m and I think we can all agree most were well worth it - Dzeko, Aguero, Tevez possibly and Milner, and fernandinho.
We also signed some of this clubs best every players in that period and after the takeover, for under the figure they mention, such as David Silva and Yaya.
In fact you could easily argue that some of our poorer signing were the cheaper ones, and we should in fact have invested more rather than settle for economic options. At the end of the day the fee doesn't dictate a players ability in every case, but it does give an indication of how they are valued by the market.
In this very selective period both Manchester teams won the league twice. However, how many of each squad was still there five years later? By which time city has won another two league titles and countless cups, compared to a relatively barren period for United.
Silva was still here, Aguero, Yaya, fernandinho, Vinny if we're allowed to include such a 'cheap' signing. For United it's pitiful and shows how short termist their thinking was in recovering from the departure of the bacon faced one. Not bad players so much, just bad strategy. Berbarov, Tosic, Obertan, Bebe, Van Persie, Zaha
The only players still there at the start of this season were De Gea, out on loan Smalling and the face. All of whom are cited as being not good enough anymore, in contrast to our lot who are very much at the core of the team.
Then we get on to the current financial health of both clubs. One is very self sufficient and turning a profit despite investing continually and seeing that return success on the field. The other is something like $700m in debt and chasing the rainbow, turning corners every five games and again talking about investing record amounts to get back on top and end years of no notable success.
I think if the author of the article asked who had invested better, then the answer is obvious. Sometimes you get what you pay for.
Bless you if you read through all of that. Evidently it is much easier for the MEN author to just write an article about how city bought success so nobody else ever had a chance.
The Rags have been in transition longer than Brunce Jenner and are still turning more corners than an origami enthusiast.
Onholiday(somemightsay)
Well-Known Member
“You’ll have amazing world class players with you here, like Jessie Lingard”[/QUOTE]
What a statement that is :-)
Not sure anyone's been that wrong since I sat my French GCSE............
Onholiday(somemightsay)
Well-Known Member
This is Madness..
'Patrols the middle of the park like a crocodile with horses legs'.
Brilliant - I love Reeves and Mortimer........
bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
'Patrols the middle of the park like a crocodile with horses legs'.
Brilliant - I love Reeves and Mortimer........
Vic and Bob are brilliant
- Status
- Not open for further replies.