Guest Immsy7 Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11095_4581884,00.html There just getting stupid. Thinking that everyone wants to go to Man City, when most of the big players around Europe probably haven't even heard of them. They have hardly any recent European history for them to know them from. They are acting like some sort of FIFA/FM game where you cheat to get loads of money and buy all the top players in the world. Someone needs to tell them that it doesn't quite work like that in real life. They have got to slowly build a squad to cement them as the 'team that looks like they may be able to challenge the top 4' i.e Villa atm, and Tottenham, Everton and Newcastle of the past. Then when they have done that they need to work on breaking into the top four and THEN they can start throwing their weight around Europe trying to get top players. The worlds best players are not going to want to go and play for a mid-table Premier league team. Thoughts/Opinions? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 Where's the harm in trying if the money is available? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtype Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 mackems.gif Really though, they need to slow down a bit. I know they're trying the Chelsea route but even Chelsea sort of "built up" a squad over 2~3 years. They can't just go out and put together a World XI in one window just because they have the cash to do so. Where's the harm in trying if the money is available? It makes you look like a joke. Devalues the club further in potential targets' eyes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 mackems.gif Really though, they need to slow down a bit. I know they're trying the Chelsea route but even Chelsea sort of "built up" a squad over 2~3 years. They can't just go out and put together a World XI in one window just because they have the cash to do so. Where's the harm in trying if the money is available? It makes you look like a joke. Devalues the club further in potential targets' eyes. But if you need a an experienced 'keeper, which they do, why not go for the best you can attain? The story might be a load of bollocks anyway, but if it's not all they did was sound out Casillas and his agent. It's not like they've released a statement saying: "WE'RE AFTER CASILLAS!" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 "My brother spoke to Manchester City many times," the 28-year-old told FourFourTwo magazine. "Their project is the kind that would interest any player - they could soon be among the best sides in England. "Lots of brilliant players are heading in their direction and yes, my brother looked properly at their offer. "But Silvio Berlusconi [Milan owner] had been saying for years that he would like to sign me and I felt in the end that it was the right time to say yes." Ronaldinho. One of the biggest players in the world, taken from SkySports.com. Today. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtype Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 mackems.gif Really though, they need to slow down a bit. I know they're trying the Chelsea route but even Chelsea sort of "built up" a squad over 2~3 years. They can't just go out and put together a World XI in one window just because they have the cash to do so. Where's the harm in trying if the money is available? It makes you look like a joke. Devalues the club further in potential targets' eyes. But if you need a an experienced 'keeper, which they do, why not go for the best you can attain? The story might be a load of bollocks anyway, but if it's not all they did was sound out Casillas and his agent. It's not like they've released a statement saying: "WE'RE AFTER CASILLAS!" Because there is no way Real would ever sell Casillas for any sum of money, and there is no way Casillas would leave Real. A better idea would be to go for the best keeper who's not already in a top side in one of the top leagues. Ambitious, but also practical. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 mackems.gif Really though, they need to slow down a bit. I know they're trying the Chelsea route but even Chelsea sort of "built up" a squad over 2~3 years. They can't just go out and put together a World XI in one window just because they have the cash to do so. Where's the harm in trying if the money is available? It makes you look like a joke. Devalues the club further in potential targets' eyes. But if you need a an experienced 'keeper, which they do, why not go for the best you can attain? The story might be a load of bollocks anyway, but if it's not all they did was sound out Casillas and his agent. It's not like they've released a statement saying: "WE'RE AFTER CASILLAS!" Because there is no way Real would ever sell Casillas for any sum of money, and there is no way Casillas would leave Real. A better idea would be to go for the best keeper who's not already in a top side in one of the top leagues. Ambitious, but also practical. Have you even read the article? If it's true (which it's probably not), it says that they offered his buy-out clause, so Real Madrid wouldn't have a say. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtype Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 mackems.gif Really though, they need to slow down a bit. I know they're trying the Chelsea route but even Chelsea sort of "built up" a squad over 2~3 years. They can't just go out and put together a World XI in one window just because they have the cash to do so. Where's the harm in trying if the money is available? It makes you look like a joke. Devalues the club further in potential targets' eyes. But if you need a an experienced 'keeper, which they do, why not go for the best you can attain? The story might be a load of bollocks anyway, but if it's not all they did was sound out Casillas and his agent. It's not like they've released a statement saying: "WE'RE AFTER CASILLAS!" Because there is no way Real would ever sell Casillas for any sum of money, and there is no way Casillas would leave Real. A better idea would be to go for the best keeper who's not already in a top side in one of the top leagues. Ambitious, but also practical. Have you even read the article? If it's true (which it's probably not), it says that they offered his buy-out clause, so Real Madrid wouldn't have a say. I haven't. Should have considered that all Spanish players have buyout clauses because of the rules in their league. here is no way Casillas would leave Real. A better idea would be to go for the best keeper who's not already in a top side in one of the top leagues. Ambitious, but also practical. still applies though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 I think they tried that with Isaksson and he proved to be a flop. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 mackems.gif Really though, they need to slow down a bit. I know they're trying the Chelsea route but even Chelsea sort of "built up" a squad over 2~3 years. They can't just go out and put together a World XI in one window just because they have the cash to do so. Where's the harm in trying if the money is available? It makes you look like a joke. Devalues the club further in potential targets' eyes. But if you need a an experienced 'keeper, which they do, why not go for the best you can attain? The story might be a load of bollocks anyway, but if it's not all they did was sound out Casillas and his agent. It's not like they've released a statement saying: "WE'RE AFTER CASILLAS!" Because there is no way Real would ever sell Casillas for any sum of money, and there is no way Casillas would leave Real. A better idea would be to go for the best keeper who's not already in a top side in one of the top leagues. Ambitious, but also practical. Have you even read the article? If it's true (which it's probably not), it says that they offered his buy-out clause, so Real Madrid wouldn't have a say. I haven't. Should have considered that all Spanish players have buyout clauses because of the rules in their league. here is no way Casillas would leave Real. A better idea would be to go for the best keeper who's not already in a top side in one of the top leagues. Ambitious, but also practical. still applies though. It does indeed, should have really mentioned that. I do think your way is more logical, of course, but I honestly can't fault them for aiming high first of all after they contrived to land Robinho over the summer. I do think they'll shock one or two with the players they manage to get in January/next summer, though, simply because of the spending power they have and the fact they've already got the first piece of the puzzle. Regardless of the circumstance that led Robinho to City, you'd imagine he'd be something of a catalyst for some other big names to go there - maybe more the likes of Diego from Werder than Sneijder from Real, though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 They will get some very good players. They'll all however be mentally weak, i.e. have no sort of loyalty or common sense, i.e. Robinho. But maybe first they should think about climbing the league table, coz at the moment, I'd say us, Villa and Portsmouth are all more likely to finish in a European spot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 Manchester City deserve a change in fortunes more than most teams to be honest. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 Manchester City deserve a change in fortunes more than most teams to be honest. Why's that? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stephen927 Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 Don't particularly like the route their taking in relation to the way money is fucking the game up, but if the moneys there then why not get the best. Casillas is the best keeper in the world, might as well try their luck. Glad he turned them down though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 They could do a lot worse than take advantage of West Ham's situation and sign Robert Green. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Snrub Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11095_4581884,00.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 They could do a lot worse than take advantage of West Ham's situation and sign Robert Green. No better than Joe Hart IMO Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtype Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 I think they tried that with Isaksson and he proved to be a flop. With infinite funds, I'm sure they could do a lot better than Isaksson. Our own Shay Given, for one. I love Shay with all my heart but if Man City comes in with 20m, I'd kiss him goodbye. And I'm sure that there are plenty of good up-and-coming keepers in Europe that I'm not aware about that they could pick up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 I rate Hart tbh, they'd be better spending the cash on other areas. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtype Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 I rate Hart tbh, they'd be better spending the cash on other areas. They could certainly do with a central defender. Probably a couple full backs as well. ...Cannavaro's fallen out with Real... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 buffons the better keeper, and 128m!! fucking hell, ashley bought our club for pretty much that amount of money!!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest K9 Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 HAHA casillas isn't even a good keeper, overated like fuck Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 HAHA casillas isn't even a good keeper, overated like f*** We'll agree to disagree. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
relámpago blanco Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 I can see me despising Man City. It's taken me about 5 years to not vomit everytime I see Chelski play. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarrenBartonCentrePartin Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 £128m is just fucking stupid. I know they're important, but even more so for a goalkeeper, especially when Hart hasn't done much wrong. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now