Left Peg
Well-Known Member
Pam said:So who will finish top 6 then, if not City?
Scum, Dippers, Chelski, Arse, Everton, Villa or Spuds
Lovingly, your local pessimist ; - )
Pam said:So who will finish top 6 then, if not City?
Paulmcfc2703 said:but we would have to pay more. Then they would buy other players to replace them (maybe from prem clubs) which would give more teams money. :(
wow, i have seen the light thank you oh wise one.AntMcfc said:moomba said:Do you think maybe it's because Terry and Torres are a little bit higher quality than Lescott and Toure?
Just maybe.
Lol yep. Say we signed Terry and Torres, we'd be the best team in the league. Sign Lescott and Toure and we're still the 5th best.
I swear some people on here think that no matter what City do it's right, and take every word a City representative says as Gospel. City do get things wrong, Hughes is not the next Mourinho, Tevez is not the next Maradona. I love the club, I'm very ambitious and very optimistic, but the one thing I don't let go of is reality. Some need to get that grip on reality back.
Brucie Bonus said:I agree with Johnmc 100%. We are all on a "steep learning-curve", but the corner-shop days are over. You can't eliminate human error, all we can honestly hope for is a batting average over .350 (which would be the dogs bollocks aamof). The underlying assumption seems to me to be that only City will buy players that do not work out, and that 100% of monies paid by City will be ploughed into players by the receiving club. It's my opinion that windfalls (if that is how you'd like to characteriZe City paying a little more than what some folks think is a fair price - a fair price though, imo, is whatever the buyer is willing to pay...but call me old Mr. Libertarian) are going to be used to service debt, or invest in infrastructure, rather than blown in toto on a player.
to call Toure and Lescott mediocre is a bit ridiculous.moomba said:Paulmcfc2703 said:but we would have to pay more. Then they would buy other players to replace them (maybe from prem clubs) which would give more teams money. :(
Like I said, there is nothing wrong with buying players from other premier league clubs.
But if you can't tell the difference between paying top money for world class players and overpaying for mediocre ones then theres not a lot of point continuing the debate.
Left Peg said:Pam said:So who will finish top 6 then, if not City?
Scum, Dippers, Chelski, Arse, Everton, Villa or Spuds
Lovingly, your local pessimist ; - )
moomba said:Paulmcfc2703 said:but we would have to pay more. Then they would buy other players to replace them (maybe from prem clubs) which would give more teams money. :(
Like I said, there is nothing wrong with buying players from other premier league clubs.
But if you can't tell the difference between paying top money for world class players and overpaying for mediocre ones then theres not a lot of point continuing the debate.
Left Peg said:Pam said:So who will finish top 6 then, if not City?
Scum, Dippers, Chelski, Arse, Everton, Villa or Spuds
Lovingly, your local pessimist ; - )
Paulmcfc2703 said:to call Toure and Lescott mediocre is a bit ridiculous.
All i am saying is what was said earlier with the whole 'we give them money and they find a better or equally good replacement' debate. We should do what is right for us and sign players beneficial to us and not worry who arsenal or anybody replace them with. If anything we are not mugs in the transfer market so we will buy at the price we feel the player is worth and nothing more.