United Thread - 2021/22

Status
Not open for further replies.
Grassland Blue said:
I cannot put into words how much I hate that club and am delighted by their current problems (and that doesn't include the latest disgraceful revelations about Greenwood!)
I believe that their edifice is crumbling about them and they are at the point where they fall away into a steep decline.
Re Greenwood, a £100m asset has become a worthless and toxic liability. Now even for a club of their size a £100m loss wants some covering.
There is the money they are wasting on PR7 and others, manager payoffs, the Glazers dividends, stadium repairs and so the list goes on.
With the continued lack of success crowd numbers will decline, media interest and sponsorship revenues will suffer and debts will be called in.
Players are already being sold (to reduce the wage commitments and bring in some hard cash?)
What a wonderful time it is to be a City fan!
Click to expand...
kingdome.gif
 
roach3 said:
Get a load of this of the caf in a thread about them ever being back to their former glory

"Not under the Glazers.

The kind of spending pattern that we’ll need to leap ahead of City, especially, but also Chelsea is not in the Glazer business model, I don’t think.

The main problem is that you have to improve your team rapidly to catch up. If you spread it over several years you never quite make it. I don’t like it and it really shouldn’t be the rule but in practice you have to outspend your rivals by a significant margin across two or three windows. Then you can go back to a more measured tweak and hone policy. We’ll never do this under the glazers.

A good manager can come in and win us a league or a trophy or two but if we want to dominate it will take more than that".
Click to expand...
They’ve only spent around £1.5bn since fergie left, but there’s nothing like a good denial when spouted over and over again.
 
roach3 said:
Get a load of this of the caf in a thread about them ever being back to their former glory

"Not under the Glazers.

The kind of spending pattern that we’ll need to leap ahead of City, especially, but also Chelsea is not in the Glazer business model, I don’t think.

The main problem is that you have to improve your team rapidly to catch up. If you spread it over several years you never quite make it. I don’t like it and it really shouldn’t be the rule but in practice you have to outspend your rivals by a significant margin across two or three windows. Then you can go back to a more measured tweak and hone policy. We’ll never do this under the glazers.

A good manager can come in and win us a league or a trophy or two but if we want to dominate it will take more than that".
Click to expand...

I thought domination was bad for the league?
 
So are their fans finally going to admit that Van de Beek isn't the answer now he's been shipped out to a struggling Everton?
 
 
TravisBickle said:
City compared to the rags are like chalk & cheese in the transfer markets these days
Could you imagine the shit we would get if we had spent like they have for the last 8/9 years with absolute nothing to show for it!
Click to expand...
I would say it’s as good an example as there is of the skewed way they are dealt with by most of the media. It’s difficult to imagine a worse return on investment than united have secured in the last decade. Genuinely reckon a random supporter picked from the terraces would have likely enjoyed more success.

They have overpaid for players whose careers have immediately gone into decline, never to recover. They have had a number of conspicuous and spectacular failures in the transfer market which have quickly descended into loan deals containing eye watering losses. They have wasted hundreds of millions of pounds. No club in world football has invested such large sums so poorly, or anything remotely close. They deserve nothing but ridicule for their incompetence, especially coming as it does, wrapped in hubris.

And yet the underlying narrative is about our spending, which by any possible metric has been significantly, overwhelmingly even, better deployed than theirs. Surely the cost of their bench invites more comments than ours given the pitiful decision making and reckless profligacy that it represents. Surely that is more newsworthy. More noteworthy.

It’s often used as a stick to beat us with that if we make a mistake in the transfer market, we can just go out and buy a replacement, despite the number of unequivocal big money failures at City being vanishingly small (Mendy, Bony spring to mind) and yet the club that routinely does it, and spends overall around the same as us, is hardly ever mentioned in those terms.

It’s an incredible track record of failure that is all too rarely reported as such, and certainly not with the force and frequency it deserves. It’s actually remarkable just how systemically bad the club’s recruitment has been, as well as being…err…clear and obvious, and a widespread failure to report it honestly in those terms can only be rooted in a conscious decision not to, which betrays an embarrassing absence of professional self-respect on the part of our sporting media in this country.
 
roach3 said:
Get a load of this of the caf in a thread about them ever being back to their former glory

"Not under the Glazers.

The kind of spending pattern that we’ll need to leap ahead of City, especially, but also Chelsea is not in the Glazer business model, I don’t think.

The main problem is that you have to improve your team rapidly to catch up. If you spread it over several years you never quite make it. I don’t like it and it really shouldn’t be the rule but in practice you have to outspend your rivals by a significant margin across two or three windows. Then you can go back to a more measured tweak and hone policy. We’ll never do this under the glazers.

A good manager can come in and win us a league or a trophy or two but if we want to dominate it will take more than that".
Click to expand...

Talking of threads on the caf…I love the "Do City leave you cold?" thread.

The real image behind the posts lol…

1643700969391.gif
 
Cotton Weave Blue said:
Spent £80m pound on 2 players who are both loaned out at Rangers and Everton. What a business model they have
Click to expand...
But one of them was actually worth 80M, so in saving 40M, they actually only really.paid 40M meaning they were each only like 20M signings and shouldn't be automatically expected to make it.
Was worth a shot at those prices.
 
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.