Guest Alan Shearer 9 Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 You never know though, half a million a week might have made him seriously consider it. Always had alot of respect for Kaka but have alot more now after this, shows it isnt always about the money. I think he would have considered it more strongly if they hadn't been so shit this season as well. Be surprised if any MASSIVE established players go to them now. Robinho's position at Madrid was unteneble after he came out crying for a move. Kaka is well settled. I think Citeh's shit season so far will really cost them in their plans to attain the world class players they seek. Parker it is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fenham Mag Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 That Blue moon forum is ridiculous atm. Just a few corkers from there: We should go for Messi now 500,00 is off the mark, it will be about £220,00 a week which is fine. If Zinedine Zidane was worth £56 Million 10 years ago , Kaka should be worth £75-£90 Million now. Claiming Man Utd are Jealous of them I'm hope this forum should never stoop to them levels of stupidity. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Alan Shearer 9 Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Even though Kaka's form in the Champion's League was exceptional the season before last, he has stumbled in his form now, I think he is vastly over rated and faced with a choice between £100 mill for Kaka or £500k for Quashie I think we all know what represents the best value for money. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest quklaani Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 The shocking thing is, SSN have nothing on this story. They say Man City are in talks with AC, yet ignore the fact that AC denied it last night - skysports.com They have an interview with Kaka from a few weeks ago saying that he would like to move to England "one day" and that moving to Man City would probably "not likely" happen. It's clear they've just launced a silly bid and Kaka is gonna reject them. Over the summer SSN ran a banner for about half an hour after Portugal got knocked out (I think) confirming that Ronaldo had left Manchester United. They're shameless. This is going to feck up football something fierce. I don't blame the billionaires, I blame the Premier League for letting this happen. Fit and proper person test, what do you have to do actually fail it? Eat a live child in front of the Pl board? Christ it'd probably have to be one of their own kids before they'd even bat an eyelid. As for people coming up with tedious excuses about how its always been this way, they need to grow some sense. Wages like this are completely unsustainable, and everyone else will have to compete. Sure its fine for City and Chelsea, but what about the rest of us, we'll pay to compete the way we've had to of late, with massively inflated ticket prices. How long do you expect fans to actually put up with that? I'm not going to panic yet, as it's still City, and they're a joke. But this summer, or maybe the next, they're probably going to start smashing up all the rules. Oh and one thing people aren't considering is what this will force other bigger clubs to do. Man Utd have to stay competitive or the club is screwed financially. If its getting to the point where to do so we have to pay obscene wages like this then we'll do the obvious. We'll fuck off the current TV deal and make our own, then the rest of the league will have to follow suit. If you think English football is stale and uncompetitive now... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thespence Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Clarkie linked with Ratboy Huddersfield want to sign Birmingham striker Kevin Phillips as a player-coach. (Daily Express) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasy Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 How many Newcastle fans complained when we broke the world record to sign Shearer? If City have the money, they've got every right to spend as much or as little ofit as they want. No point complaining, it just smacks of jealousy imo. It's not the £100m transfer fee, of course they can spend what money they want. It's the quoted £250,000-£500,000 a week wages. That's absolutely pathetic. Some footballers will be lucky to make that in their entire career tbh. It'll ruin football because no matter how well players like Kaka play on the pitch, they'll make nearly 2-3m per month regardless. you can't blame the players for the inflated wages though I don't, my problem is with Man City but they're not doing anything wrong. They're offering to give a player 26 million pound a year, what's right about that?! It will corrupt football. This is a real test of just how far we've come in these past few years. If Kaka signs for Man City, it'll just confirm what many have worried about - that football is dying and just like anything else it's about money. If Kaka really cares about football, he'll stay at Milan. It's a better club, better league position, Champions League football etc. Man City are nothing atm. I don't like it anymore than you do, but who's to judge what they spend their money on. this type of thing has been happening ever since football became professional, just that now it has reached enormous levels. the more the game brings in, the more that will go out. But that money isn't coming from football. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syrette Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 I love how people keep texting in to places like SSN praising Kaka for not being bothered about the money he could get at Man City. What a role model... ... poor guy is only on £10.8m a year at Milan. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Snrub Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Hopefully Man City will try and sign Messi and/or Eto'o aswell. It's really amusing watching them embarrass themselves like this. Fucking nothing club. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syrette Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Hey, be fair, they'll get Scott Parker. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Heneage Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 I love how people keep texting in to places like SSN praising Kaka for not being bothered about the money he could get at Man City. What a role model... ... poor guy is only on £10.8m a year at Milan. But if you could earn £1m a month, excluding bonuses, that could set generations of your family up just off the interest. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.S.R. Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Think of the income tax he'll have to pay on that, along with all the other players City will sign. It could singlehandedly save the economy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 How many Newcastle fans complained when we broke the world record to sign Shearer? If City have the money, they've got every right to spend as much or as little ofit as they want. No point complaining, it just smacks of jealousy imo. When we signed Shearer, where did the money come from? Where were we in terms of league standing? Fair point we were one of the best teams in the country when he signed and we got obviously found the money from somewhere to make it happen. This arab bloke has waltzed in with loads of cash to spend and he wants instant success so he's prepared to pay through the nose to get the big names in. He's clearly not prepared to build things up slowly and if they've got the cash to make a real go of it then that's their good fortune. We signed a raft to players for big money to get to and stay near the top of the League and they're just starting the process. At least part of the money for Shearer came from later sales of Sir Les, Huckerby, Kitson etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor Swift Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 The shocking thing is, SSN have nothing on this story. They say Man City are in talks with AC, yet ignore the fact that AC denied it last night - skysports.com They have an interview with Kaka from a few weeks ago saying that he would like to move to England "one day" and that moving to Man City would probably "not likely" happen. It's clear they've just launced a silly bid and Kaka is gonna reject them. Over the summer SSN ran a banner for about half an hour after Portugal got knocked out (I think) confirming that Ronaldo had left Manchester United. They're shameless. This is going to feck up football something fierce. I don't blame the billionaires, I blame the Premier League for letting this happen. Fit and proper person test, what do you have to do actually fail it? Eat a live child in front of the Pl board? Christ it'd probably have to be one of their own kids before they'd even bat an eyelid. As for people coming up with tedious excuses about how its always been this way, they need to grow some sense. Wages like this are completely unsustainable, and everyone else will have to compete. Sure its fine for City and Chelsea, but what about the rest of us, we'll pay to compete the way we've had to of late, with massively inflated ticket prices. How long do you expect fans to actually put up with that? I'm not going to panic yet, as it's still City, and they're a joke. But this summer, or maybe the next, they're probably going to start smashing up all the rules. Oh and one thing people aren't considering is what this will force other bigger clubs to do. Man Utd have to stay competitive or the club is screwed financially. If its getting to the point where to do so we have to pay obscene wages like this then we'll do the obvious. We'll fuck off the current TV deal and make our own, then the rest of the league will have to follow suit. If you think English football is stale and uncompetitive now... What does the fit and proper person test have to do with any of this? Does being mega-rich mean that they're not 'fit and proper'? Or is the spending insane amount of money part that bothers you? They have a competitive advantage and they're using it. If you want to laugh at them, I suggest you do so now because when they get one or two players in, the rest will follow and that's when everyone's fucked, including Man Utd. Stop whining like a little girl just because they're going to outspend you It's good for City. They're lucky that their owner/s picked them out of all the other clubs and they will be very fortunate to watch some great players play for them (which they will, in time, no doubt do). Face it, in a few years' time, City will probably have won a few trophies, whether they be mere Cups or an actual league title remains to be seen but they will challenge and break up the top 4, which, from an objective sense, will be awesome to watch. The league will become more competitive with the influx of more foreign talent and the overall quality will increase (as it has in the past 10 years). With there being only 4 CL places, having 5 teams that actually have a shot at the title each year will be fun to watch. It'll be even more enjoyable if Man Utd finish 5th each year Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mowen Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 I love how people keep texting in to places like SSN praising Kaka for not being bothered about the money he could get at Man City. What a role model... ... poor guy is only on £10.8m a year at Milan. What's his basic from Milan though? I'll bet it's a lot lower than that. I know he's already earning more than anyone could ever realistically dream of, but £30m+ would turn anyone's head. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syrette Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 I know he's already earning more than anyone could ever realistically dream of, but £30m+ would turn anyone's head. I'm not saying it wouldn't. My comment was against the people sending stuff to SSN and the like, not Kaka. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mowen Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Think of the income tax he'll have to pay on that, along with all the other players City will sign. It could singlehandedly save the economy. Was saying this in the office Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
midds Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 How many Newcastle fans complained when we broke the world record to sign Shearer? If City have the money, they've got every right to spend as much or as little ofit as they want. No point complaining, it just smacks of jealousy imo. When we signed Shearer, where did the money come from? Where were we in terms of league standing? Fair point we were one of the best teams in the country when he signed and we got obviously found the money from somewhere to make it happen. This arab bloke has waltzed in with loads of cash to spend and he wants instant success so he's prepared to pay through the nose to get the big names in. He's clearly not prepared to build things up slowly and if they've got the cash to make a real go of it then that's their good fortune. We signed a raft to players for big money to get to and stay near the top of the League and they're just starting the process. At least part of the money for Shearer came from later sales of Sir Les, Huckerby, Kitson etc. True, but at the time I remember lots of fans saying very similar things about us signing Shearer as I'm reading today about Kaka. It was jealousy back then and it's jealousy now. Don't buy this 'bad for the game' stuff. City are about to raise the (financial) bar and it's up to the other clubs to compete. If they can't, City could dominate in the same way Man U have done for the last 15 years. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syrette Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Don't buy this 'bad for the game' stuff. City are about to raise the (financial) bar and it's up to the other clubs to compete. If they can't, City could dominate in the same way Man U have done for the last 15 years. That's the problem though, they can't. The distance between those with money and those without will grow wider and wider and make the league less and less competitive at the top level. Clubs will be relying on foreign investment and spending lots on players and wages will spiral out of control. The best players from the have-nots will end up mostly playing for the rich clubs. So I completely disagree with you that it's not bad for the game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilko Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Owen "The Tampon" Hargreaves being linked with a move to Sevilla for £8m, says Setanta Sports News. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest quklaani Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 What does the fit and proper person test have to do with any of this? Does being mega-rich mean that they're not 'fit and proper'? You never know, it might be something to do with how they got their money, or their authoritarian rule of a million or so people. They've inherited billions off the back of a genetic fluke, and are ploughing it into ruining English football while ignoring the problems of their own populace and their Emirate's inevitable collapse as it's only tangible source of income runs out.* Yeah, I just hate them cause they're rich, that's it, I'm a hippy. I'm going to try and briefly** make my point though, in a nice simple chart form. And before I do I should add that City's new owners are merely an ultimate result of where football has been going over the last decade, its not entirely their fault, but if you'll excuse the slightly racist pun, they'll be the palm tree that breaks the camel's back. I'll hide it so I don't take up half the page: 1. City have effectively limitless resources 2. City start to pay their new players astronomical fees because otherwise nobody would play for them. 3. All City players begin to demand these excessive wages because they want parity, and because they know the club can afford it. 4. Other clubs in England and across Europe come under pressure to pay wages that are at least comparable to the city Galacticos. 5. Wage bills double again, becoming an ever higher proportion of a club's total costs, I believe they're already a majority for the most part, though can't cite anything because I can't be bothered to look around. 6. Clubs need more money to deal with this, to be able to compete. 7. Ticket prices continue to skyrocket because matchday income is still by far the largest source of income for clubs. 8. Fans gradually lose interest in paying such exorbitant prices, attendances fall away and the soul of football is eroded even more. 9. The biggest clubs over here copy those on the continent and make their own TV deals, screwing clubs with less global appeal. 10a. Either we end up with (at best) an SPL-like system where a couple of clubs who can afford to draw in the money to compete with city fight it out with them every year and the rest just sort of live in Limbo, or (and if the economy doesn't drag itself out of the mire sharpish that is pretty much certain)... 10b. ...Football go boom. A lot of people were worried about Chelsea having this effect, and certainly they've pushed us along that road. However the key difference is Chelsea were never rich enough to sustain that kind of spending. City, if we are to believe what people say, have no such limit. Of course I should note this is all worst case scenario stuff, but if City start paying someone a couple million a month then we know we're well on the way. *This is an incredibly simplistic take on a massively complex issue, but it was just my simple way of putting that they are, as with most of the ruling families in that part of the world, a set of bastards. **Hmm, fecked that up didn't I? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
1878 Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 How many Newcastle fans complained when we broke the world record to sign Shearer? If City have the money, they've got every right to spend as much or as little ofit as they want. No point complaining, it just smacks of jealousy imo. When we signed Shearer, where did the money come from? Where were we in terms of league standing? Fair point we were one of the best teams in the country when he signed and we got obviously found the money from somewhere to make it happen. This arab bloke has waltzed in with loads of cash to spend and he wants instant success so he's prepared to pay through the nose to get the big names in. He's clearly not prepared to build things up slowly and if they've got the cash to make a real go of it then that's their good fortune. We signed a raft to players for big money to get to and stay near the top of the League and they're just starting the process. At least part of the money for Shearer came from later sales of Sir Les, Huckerby, Kitson etc. True, but at the time I remember lots of fans saying very similar things about us signing Shearer as I'm reading today about Kaka. It was jealousy back then and it's jealousy now. Don't buy this 'bad for the game' stuff. City are about to raise the (financial) bar and it's up to the other clubs to compete. If they can't, City could dominate in the same way Man U have done for the last 15 years. It's not just raising the financial bar though. It's launching it into another planet. The world's highest paid players at the moment are on around £150k a week but even the more conservative estimates in today's rags were claiming they will double(!) that figure for Kaka. It's obscene and will have a knock on effect for every other club in the top divisions around the world. Even Chelsea weren't anywhere near this bad when Abramovich went on his initial spending spree. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luc Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Owen "The Tampon" Hargreaves being linked with a move to Sevilla for £8m, says Setanta Sports News. Yeah right, even Leeds wouldn't have him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
midds Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Don't buy this 'bad for the game' stuff. City are about to raise the (financial) bar and it's up to the other clubs to compete. If they can't, City could dominate in the same way Man U have done for the last 15 years. That's the problem though, they can't. The distance between those with money and those without will grow wider and wider and make the league less and less competitive at the top level. Clubs will be relying on foreign investment and spending lots on players and wages will spiral out of control. The best players from the have-nots will end up mostly playing for the rich clubs. So I completely disagree with you that it's not bad for the game. Fair enough. I'm talking about competing by finding and developing young players who will eventually be better than the 'finished article' that City are targetting. If they can't compete financially then they have to change the way they operate to make sure they do compete on the field. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 What does the fit and proper person test have to do with any of this? Does being mega-rich mean that they're not 'fit and proper'? You never know, it might be something to do with how they got their money, or their authoritarian rule of a million or so people. They've inherited billions off the back of a genetic fluke, and are ploughing it into ruining English football while ignoring the problems of their own populace and their Emirate's inevitable collapse as it's only tangible source of income runs out.* Yeah, I just hate them cause they're rich, that's it, I'm a hippy. I'm going to try and briefly** make my point though, in a nice simple chart form. And before I do I should add that City's new owners are merely an ultimate result of where football has been going over the last decade, its not entirely their fault, but if you'll excuse the slightly racist pun, they'll be the palm tree that breaks the camel's back. Abu Dhabi is not Dubai, they are richer and are seemingly more prudent in their investments, not as superfluously flamboyant as Dubai seems, but with an actual focus behind the spending. They need to spend some of their petro-money and immediately, as to ward off inflation, which is a problem that could plague the likes of Kuwait and Qatar whose oil money cannot be spent due to lack of infrastructure etc. then they're hit by inflationary crisis. Abu Dhabi is less afflicted by problems in comparison to Dubai, who'll face their property bubble bursting (if it hasn't already), the maltreatment of foreign workers and ethics behind that in addition to the dwindling 'pure-blood' Emirati populous. Some of these affect Abu Dhabi, but a lot less, I'd say. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
midds Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 How many Newcastle fans complained when we broke the world record to sign Shearer? If City have the money, they've got every right to spend as much or as little ofit as they want. No point complaining, it just smacks of jealousy imo. When we signed Shearer, where did the money come from? Where were we in terms of league standing? Fair point we were one of the best teams in the country when he signed and we got obviously found the money from somewhere to make it happen. This arab bloke has waltzed in with loads of cash to spend and he wants instant success so he's prepared to pay through the nose to get the big names in. He's clearly not prepared to build things up slowly and if they've got the cash to make a real go of it then that's their good fortune. We signed a raft to players for big money to get to and stay near the top of the League and they're just starting the process. At least part of the money for Shearer came from later sales of Sir Les, Huckerby, Kitson etc. True, but at the time I remember lots of fans saying very similar things about us signing Shearer as I'm reading today about Kaka. It was jealousy back then and it's jealousy now. Don't buy this 'bad for the game' stuff. City are about to raise the (financial) bar and it's up to the other clubs to compete. If they can't, City could dominate in the same way Man U have done for the last 15 years. It's not just raising the financial bar though. It's launching it into another planet. The world's highest paid players at the moment are on around £150k a week but even the more conservative estimates in today's rags were claiming they will double(!) that figure for Kaka. It's obscene and will have a knock on effect for every other club in the top divisions around the world. Even Chelsea weren't anywhere near this bad when Abramovich went on his initial spending spree. It will have a knock-on effect yes. They obscene money they're shelling out is going straight to other clubs to spend on alternative players. They aren't giving it to charity, they'll be giving it to the clubs who can spend it on strengthening their own squad at the expense of losing one of their top players. The City transfer fees will eventually trickle down the divisions so from that respect I'd argue it is probably beneficial to the game. There's 2 ways of looking at it imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts