Best British manager of recent times. (SAF, Paisley, Clough...)

[Froggy]

So it's not £35million net then. It's £35million gross, and that figure is still wrong. We spent £35million+ in a transfer window maybe five times in Fergies reign, and when we did we sold players which made up a fair portion of that outlay. Like I said, not including Ronaldo the net spend per season wouldn't even be £15million. We have thirteen Premier League titles to show for that.

 

The wage bill comment is also incorrect, as Barca, Madrid, City and Chelsea all have considerably higher wage bills than us. Should Rooney leave we would drop another few places, saying he is on £250,000 a week.

[brummie]

Eh?

 

How much did you spend net last season, then? Net?

 

There's also no point looking at net spend per season since the PL began, because that was over 20 years ago - when the record transfer fee was a little over five million.

 

Nobody is denying that Ferguson's trophy haul is brilliant, it is, but you've also spent a lot of money in doing it. Don't go making yourselves out to be some kind of slightly spendier version of Everton.

[Froggy]

It was about £35million last season. That's for six players, five of which were 23 and under and the other being Robin van Persie. That was repaid with the league title.

 

It's hardly a massive amount in modern day football as well. I'm sure I don't need to remind you that Villa spent well over £20million themselves last season, net.

 

 

[Deuce]

Pulis.

[Froggy]

Nobody is denying that Ferguson's trophy haul is brilliant, it is, but you've also spent a lot of money in doing it. Don't go making yourselves out to be some kind of slightly spendier version of Everton.

 

I'm not, I'm just saying it's not as high as people think it is. From '92 until '99 our net spend was about £25million. We won five league titles, three FA cups and a Champions League in that period. Quite a few teams, including Newcastle, Arsenal and Liverpool, outspent us by quite a bit then. Villa, Chelsea, Spurs and Everton spent roughly the same. We hardly bought the trophies when everyone else spent the same or more.

 

[brummie]

Nobody is denying that Ferguson's trophy haul is brilliant, it is, but you've also spent a lot of money in doing it. Don't go making yourselves out to be some kind of slightly spendier version of Everton.

 

I'm not, I'm just saying it's not as high as people think it is. From '92 until '99 our net spend was about £25million. We won five league titles, three FA cups and a Champions League in that period. Quite a few teams, including Newcastle, Arsenal and Liverpool, outspent us by quite a bit then. Villa, Chelsea, Spurs and Everton spent roughly the same. We hardly bought the trophies when everyone else spent the same or more.

 

 

Pointing out you spent a lot of money is not the same as suggesting you bought the trophies.

[Guest neesy111]

Ferguson's transfer record is certainly open to debate.

[Froggy]

Nobody is denying that Ferguson's trophy haul is brilliant, it is, but you've also spent a lot of money in doing it. Don't go making yourselves out to be some kind of slightly spendier version of Everton.

 

I'm not, I'm just saying it's not as high as people think it is. From '92 until '99 our net spend was about £25million. We won five league titles, three FA cups and a Champions League in that period. Quite a few teams, including Newcastle, Arsenal and Liverpool, outspent us by quite a bit then. Villa, Chelsea, Spurs and Everton spent roughly the same. We hardly bought the trophies when everyone else spent the same or more.

 

 

Pointing out you spent a lot of money is not the same as suggesting you bought the trophies.

 

That's what I assumed you were incinuating. Apologies if it wasn't. I think Fergusons spending has been perfectly fine due to prize money brought in before hand and funds from players sold.

[alexthegreat]

He always had the finanacial advantage you would expect at the biggest club in the country throughout the 90s. They broke the transfer record for Cole (in 95), had been able to buy Keane for a record before that, Yorke was the second highest fee to an English club in 98 (after Shearer), and Stam was a world record deal for a centre half at £11m in the same year.

 

It was just after this period that he could really make their commercial strength count though:

 

He got Veron for 28m in 2001 so he could "freshen things up" (put him on the bench as it eventually turned out), and they got van Nistelrooy for 19m in the same summer as well.

 

He spent £30m on a centre half when he bought Ferdinand in 2002. Thats still an enormous figure now.

 

Yet Wenger was still able to finish above him in 2002 and 2004.

 

If the Glazers hadnt appeared perhaps they would have been able to carry on spending in a similar fashion to Real Madrid.

 

However, both Fergie and Wenger appear to have had to deal with severe financial restraints since that era, whatever they may claim in public, and there is no doubt who has coped better.

 

If Fergie had gone ahead and retired a decade ago then maybe the finances argument would undermine his achievements a bit, however I think the last 10 years going up against Chelsea and then City with the Glazers in charge are enough to refute that argument, and theres 3 European Cup finals in that time as well.

[Guest Howaythetoon]

Fergie turned Man Utd from a sleeping former English giant into arguably the world's biggest football club. They are huge, on a different level to anyone in the game outside of maybe Real Madrid and Barcelona. They don't have an Abramovic or rich Arabs yet they can compete with anyone and that's down to Ferguson. He wasn't just a manager at Man Utd, he was the CEO, he was everything. There will never be anyone like him or anyone capable of transforming a club in the way he did. Lets face it, Man Utd in the 80s heading towards the 90s, were less popular than Everton and Spurs, two clubs they could buy and sell all day long any given day of the week right now. They are a behomath.

 

What irks me and always will, is that way back in 95-96, we were literally neck and neck in every single way in terms of finances, ability to attract players, pay fees and wages etc. other than the fact they had more seats than we did and therefore generated slightly more income. If Twitter existed back then hash tag NUFC would have been trending far more than hash tag MUFC put it that way.

 

Man Utd have always been a big club, one or England's biggest, but because of Fergie, they become one of the world's biggest, if not the biggest and Moyes or no Moyes, I can't see that changing anytime soon.

[manosdepiedra]

Sir Matt Busby built one of the best sides this country's seen, saw it and himself virtually wiped out, then got out of his hospital bed to build another one, including two of his lads from the plane crash, which won the European Cup. Thats the greatest feat in English football history iyam. The crash made the modern manu as much as Fergie did. Huge financial muscle after that, even in the two decades they went without a league title.

[Parky]

So it's not £35million net then. It's £35million gross, and that figure is still wrong. We spent £35million+ in a transfer window maybe five times in Fergies reign, and when we did we sold players which made up a fair portion of that outlay. Like I said, not including Ronaldo the net spend per season wouldn't even be £15million. We have thirteen Premier League titles to show for that.

 

The wage bill comment is also incorrect, as Barca, Madrid, City and Chelsea all have considerably higher wage bills than us. Should Rooney leave we would drop another few places, saying he is on £250,000 a week.

 

Yeah you're quite right ManU doesn't spend any money and the wages are really low and fergie doesn't cry like a whore if there isn't 15 extra time if they are a goal down.

[Parky]

Fergie turned Man Utd from a sleeping former English giant into arguably the world's biggest football club. They are huge, on a different level to anyone in the game outside of maybe Real Madrid and Barcelona. They don't have an Abramovic or rich Arabs yet they can compete with anyone and that's down to Ferguson. He wasn't just a manager at Man Utd, he was the CEO, he was everything. There will never be anyone like him or anyone capable of transforming a club in the way he did. Lets face it, Man Utd in the 80s heading towards the 90s, were less popular than Everton and Spurs, two clubs they could buy and sell all day long any given day of the week right now. They are a behomath.

 

What irks me and always will, is that way back in 95-96, we were literally neck and neck in every single way in terms of finances, ability to attract players, pay fees and wages etc. other than the fact they had more seats than we did and therefore generated slightly more income. If Twitter existed back then hash tag NUFC would have been trending far more than hash tag MUFC put it that way.

 

Man Utd have always been a big club, one or England's biggest, but because of Fergie, they become one of the world's biggest, if not the biggest and Moyes or no Moyes, I can't see that changing anytime soon.

 

With Mou returning and ManC with all that cash he's gonna find it hard next season. Think they'll finish 3rd.

[brummie]

It probably says a bit about current football (and about me, too, I guess) to say that I really could not give one hundredth of a flying fuck who wins the league next year.

[ponsaelius]

Bob Paisley. Took over the reigns from Shankly.

 

Following victory in the 1974 FA Cup Final, Bill Shankly suddenly announced his retirement. In the wake of the shock announcement, the directors of Liverpool turned to the unassuming Paisley as his replacement, in the hope of maintaining continuity.

 

Paisley would prove to be a huge success at Liverpool, winning at least one trophy in eight of his nine years as manager. Hugely disappointed by finishing second in his first season as manager, the team went on to win the title in 1976. This period marked the beginning of Liverpool's dominance of English and European football, as the team went on to become Champions on five occasions - finishing second twice - as well as winning three League Cups, one UEFA Cup, one UEFA Super Cup, six Charity Shields and, most significantly, three European Cups.

 

Liverpool's dominance of the era in English and European football was primarily challenged by Nottingham Forest under Brian Clough, and Aston Villa under Ron Saunders and Tony Barton. Paisley remains the only man in history to manage three European Cup-winning sides. He also won an unprecedented six Manager of the Year Awards. The only trophy that Paisley failed to win as manager was the FA Cup, although Liverpool would be runners-up in 1977.

 

Three European Cups in the days it was home and away knock out (iirc) and it included only the champions from each country.

 

That makes it easier.