The Prophet Posted June 28, 2009 Share Posted June 28, 2009 A lot of people will see this as a no brainer. Would you rather be in City's position spending your way to the top, buying the best players in the buisness and in the eyes of some ruining the game. Throwing massive amounts of money at players will provide money and long term success but what happens if it all goes wrong, what if the backer loses interest or in the case of poor Gretna ends up on his death bed? Or would you rather be in our current position searching for an honest owner, looking to re-structure the foundations of the club and essentially provide long term success and stability? We're in a lower division, we're ownerless, we're managerless but surely once the owner of the club is in place for the long term things will begin to turn around at some stage. Personally for me it is a no brainer. I'd rather be up there with the riches, the success and the big league. Some people may feel differently but the only way to compete at the top is to spend silly money like Chelsea and Man City. I'd have no problem with it in the slightest especially compared to the situation we currently find ourselves in. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gggg Posted June 28, 2009 Share Posted June 28, 2009 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stephen927 Posted June 28, 2009 Share Posted June 28, 2009 It's the way the game is these days. If you can't beat them, join them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted June 28, 2009 Share Posted June 28, 2009 If the option was City vs Villa/Everton, I'd pick the latter every time. The Chelsea/City model disgusts me tbh. It's not really even a question when we're in the league below and threatening to disappear into oblivion. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEMTEX Posted June 28, 2009 Share Posted June 28, 2009 Idiot count so far: 4. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prophet Posted June 28, 2009 Share Posted June 28, 2009 Aye agree with Dave, who are the four who voted for our situation so far? It would be nice to hear your point of view, the thread is a bit one sided at the minute. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted June 28, 2009 Share Posted June 28, 2009 i'd rather be in our position as i look daft in sky blue. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEMTEX Posted June 28, 2009 Share Posted June 28, 2009 i'd rather be in our position as i look daft in sky blue. and you don't look daft in custard creme stripes? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted June 28, 2009 Share Posted June 28, 2009 i'd rather be in our position as i look daft in sky blue. and you don't look daft in custard creme stripes? tbf i look daft in most things. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Heneage Posted June 28, 2009 Share Posted June 28, 2009 I'd take an arabs money in a heartbeat, why not? Seeing the best players play for my club is the dream of every football fan. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted June 28, 2009 Share Posted June 28, 2009 It's easy to say City's position when we are we are at the moment, but it's going to end, and it's going to take alot of clubs with them, Chelsea, City, Portsmouth. We are already starting to see Roman lose interest in Chelsea and him not putting as much money in as he used to, within 5-10 years these teams will be in loads of debt, and what happens if Fifa put a cap on players wages and transfers, these clubs will have to pay penalty charges for the remainder of the contracts and all other clubs will be in basically the same situation as everyone else. Who is to say that we won't make a team of superstars from nothing and be able to sell them to these clubs and buy our own players for less, safegarding our club for years and years in the process. Then again, maybe I should just shut up now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmonkey Posted June 28, 2009 Share Posted June 28, 2009 If the option was City vs Villa/Everton, I'd pick the latter every time. The Chelsea/City model disgusts me tbh. Prefer Everton's model the best. Villa, not really sure about lumping them in with Everton. I don't know the extent to which they've spent their cash so may be wrong here, but I've had the impression that they've spent heavily since Lerner's takeover, more than they would have been able to afford previously. Therefore they're being funded by a billionaire and aren't really operating like Everton, i.e. within their means. Granted they've not been anything like as horrid as Chelsea/City who've gone out and bought players way above their station by offering ridiculous fees and ridiculous wages, including buying players that they don't need/want purely to prevent the competition from landing them, but still, the ideal is that all clubs should be spending money that they earn or have access to on account of the revenues they produce, rather than having some super rich guy take over and bankroll them to unearnt/undeserved success. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gash Posted June 28, 2009 Share Posted June 28, 2009 As previously said, Everton>Man City (Top Flight)>Newcastle Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted June 28, 2009 Share Posted June 28, 2009 Yes, without a doubt. However, I wouldn't want us spending £20m on players like Barry with one year left on his contract. If we were to get some arab who were looking at mega spending, I'd want us to either mega spend on top players (a la £32m on Robinho) or buy good players at good prices (Given, for example). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Snrub Posted June 28, 2009 Share Posted June 28, 2009 I'd like us to have a rich owner obviously, but would also like us to be less obnoxious with money than Man City are and be more realistic. They're a joke, throwing truck loads of money at the worlds best players when they're not even in any european competition next season. Go for Casillas, end up with Given. Go for Kaka, end up with Bellamy. This trend won't change imo, and they will just remain a joke. I think the likes of us are much more deserving of a super rich owner than Man City are. Since the Premier League began they've been a total nothing club and have had no impact on football whatsoever. At least a team like us has challenged for the Premiership on more than one occasion, been in more than 1 FA Cup final and been in the Champions League more than once. Until Mike Ashley showed up, we wouldn't have looked out of place challenging for things, where as a team like Man City just crawl out of nowhere and try to buy instant success in a very classless manor.[/bitter rant] Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted June 28, 2009 Share Posted June 28, 2009 I think I would rather be like Arsenal, won things (although not in a long time by their standards), and are always in the top 4, spending very little aswell, and having from what I hear, one of the best wage bills around. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stephen927 Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 Chelsea only went after a couple of the very best. The others were very good, but were at clubs in lesser leagues and were desperate to make the step to the Premier League. The likes of Cech, Drogba, Essien, Ferreira, Carvalho.. Then a few already top players which didn't quite work out for them like Crespo and Veron. Man City need to start looking for the top players who aren't already at big clubs and offer them the stupid wages, then go for a couple from the bigger clubs once they have a decent base (Champions League football). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
macphisto Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 Any Newcastle fan who can remember what it was like when Keegan/John Hall were here the first time round will know how good it is to splash the cash! We did break the world record for a player (Shearer) and for a defender (Barton) so relatively speaking we were not too different from what City are doing now! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colos Short and Curlies Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 I'll stick my hand up, I would hate for us to be doing a City. Football will eat itself, and right now the knives and forks are being put on the table, we are at a situation where its no longer about development of players, maintaining links with the locality of the club and having an identity. Its identikit stadia, identikit strategy and identikit teams. Ironically the one team breaking this mould is the most successful team in the country, but Man Utd are a different breed to every other premier league club. What is the difference to supporting Liverpool, Chelsea or City now? None of these clubs represent their history and heritage. they will in all probability all play the same style of football next season and the make up of the teams (in terms of nationality and ratio of home grown to imported (i.e. bought in regardless of country) will be one and the same. Then move down a rung or 2 of the ladder. Bolton, Sunderland, Hull. All live in Mechano flat pack stadia, all buy the cheap imitations of the Chelsea et al players and all play a lite style of their football. Yes it sucks being relegated, but I bet as fans we enjoy next season more than than true (i.e. not johnny come latelys) City fans. A lot of us have played/play FM, and most of us have at one time given oursleves an unlimited budget. It's an empty feeling winning the league like that. As a product the Premier League has had a good run, but its coming to an end and will need to be reinvented. The next few years will be looked back on as being the bad days of the concept. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brummie Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 Chelsea only went after a couple of the very best. The others were very good, but were at clubs in lesser leagues and were desperate to make the step to the Premier League. The likes of Cech, Drogba, Essien, Ferreira, Carvalho.. Then a few already top players which didn't quite work out for them like Crespo and Veron. Man City need to start looking for the top players who aren't already at big clubs and offer them the stupid wages, then go for a couple from the bigger clubs once they have a decent base (Champions League football). People also assume that Chelsea's rebirth started with RA. It didn't. They benefitted from the largesse of Matthew Harding for a fair while before, as well. For all the hatred (justified, mostly) of how Chelsea operate, even they didn't go bat shit mental straight from the off like Man City have. One of two things will happen at the end of this (and possibly both). One is Man City will, eventually, be left in a worse state than when they started. The other is that football will eat itself. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mowen Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 It isn't a no-brainer. It's the opposite. It's a real brainer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Phil K Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 Always been irritated by the claims of "buying their way to trophies" of the Man U/Liverpool/Arsenal-supporting media. Whenever anyone DARES to upset the status quo and trophy winning, this crap gets wheeled out, and the money spent by Man U and Liverpool in paticular gets forgotten. It shows how monumentally THICK most fans are that THEY start to mouth off the same crap (unless it's THEIR team) - Man City fans are just as guilty, and now suddenly have forgotten their previous stance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colos Short and Curlies Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 Always been irritated by the claims of "buying their way to trophies" of the Man U/Liverpool/Arsenal-supporting media. Whenever anyone DARES to upset the status quo and trophy winning, this crap gets wheeled out, and the money spent by Man U and Liverpool in paticular gets forgotten. It shows how monumentally THICK most fans are that THEY start to mouth off the same crap (unless it's THEIR team) - Man City fans are just as guilty, and now suddenly have forgotten their previous stance. To be fair I think Man Utd are different in the fact that they have earned the right to spend money, most of their expenditure is self financed. I know that in our time we have spent heavily, as have Blackburn for example, there is a difference however in that neither we nor they were completly distorting the market place. Man City aren't simply outbidding rivals, they are picking random numbers out of thin air for before fees and wages Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mowen Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 Always been irritated by the claims of "buying their way to trophies" of the Man U/Liverpool/Arsenal-supporting media. Whenever anyone DARES to upset the status quo and trophy winning, this crap gets wheeled out, and the money spent by Man U and Liverpool in paticular gets forgotten. It shows how monumentally THICK most fans are that THEY start to mouth off the same crap (unless it's THEIR team) - Man City fans are just as guilty, and now suddenly have forgotten their previous stance. To an extent I agree, but ManU got most of their money because they've been (give or take) the best team in the country for the past twenty years, a lot of which was based on the fact they brought a number of superb youngsters through their academy (Giggs, Beckham, Nevilles, Scholes, even Nicky Butt). It feels more like they've earned the right to spend extravagent amounts of money to stay at the top of the pile. What have City ever done to deserve it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 Always been irritated by the claims of "buying their way to trophies" of the Man U/Liverpool/Arsenal-supporting media. Whenever anyone DARES to upset the status quo and trophy winning, this crap gets wheeled out, and the money spent by Man U and Liverpool in paticular gets forgotten. It shows how monumentally THICK most fans are that THEY start to mouth off the same crap (unless it's THEIR team) - Man City fans are just as guilty, and now suddenly have forgotten their previous stance. To be fair I think Man Utd are different in the fact that they have earned the right to spend money, most of their expenditure is self financed. I know that in our time we have spent heavily, as have Blackburn for example, there is a difference however in that neither we nor they were completly distorting the market place. Man City aren't simply outbidding rivals, they are picking random numbers out of thin air for before fees and wages Like their ludicrous bid for Kaka, worth almost twice what he eventually went for. 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