Jump to content

Other clubs' transfers


Greg

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Stifler said:

Not say that Man Utd owners aren’t bad, but I think the main issue people have with their fans calling the Glaziers bad is because they do it because Man Utd are not successful.

If Man Utd we’re winning the league etc, then I doubt any Man Utd fan would be complaining about how they are run and how they were bought via a leveraged buyout and the debt keeps getting piled on.

If Man Utd went out this summer and rebuilt and won the title for the next 3 years on the back of more debt, the people complaining now wouldn’t give a fuck, and would only start complaining again when that period of success stopped.

Weird argument.

 

If we were in Europe every year under Ashley, we would've been happy with him too.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, The College Dropout said:

You can. They've spent money the club has generated. You can argue they've sourced good commercial deals but they've also saddled that club with crazy debt. Their stadium is decrepid too.

 

 

 

 

 

Well I know you would, but I don't think most people are going to compare a transfer spend higher than Man City's with Mike Ashley's at Newcastle just because the funds are generated in the same way. The proof is there that Man United could have spent the same amount of money they have on recruitment, with the Glazers still taking money out of the club, and been very successful at the same time. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree largely but even under Ashley we could have spent what he spent better with a good coach and been a lot more successful. This was the most baffling thing about his era, if he's appointed decent people to run the club, he could have left them too it, say you need to be self sustainable and money could have been spent on academy to generate saleable assets and never had to do anything with the club except take money out of it to fund his nights out. But he didn't, he sabotagued the club making any revenue, used us as an advertising board for shite direct and got involved in transfers. It was baffling.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

 

Well I know you would, but I don't think most people are going to compare a transfer spend higher than Man City's with Mike Ashley's at Newcastle just because the funds are generated in the same way. The proof is there that Man United could have spent the same amount of money they have on recruitment, with the Glazers still taking money out of the club, and been very successful at the same time. 

The comparison is awful ownership.

 

- Negligble investment in infrastructure 

- Leadership mismanagement at every level of the club (CEO all the way down to the football managers). Keeping poor performing leadership staff on the payroll

- Using the club for own financial gain - at the detriment of the club (Ashley free sponsorship, SD deals. Glazers all that debt)

- Owners minimum sporting targets are well below the minimum targets of the fans. And the owners manage to miss their own targets often enough.

 

The details are different. Sure Man U have spent in the transfer market (and they only did this post-Fergie) but they did nothing to ensure those transfers would equate to good sustained performance on the pitch. I've heard journalists say "Ashley spent £140m in his last 2 seasons at the club. Something like a £90m net spend. What else do we want?" Leadership that tries to ensure money spent is equated to success on the pitch. We overspent on Joelinton and with Bruce in charge it any decent transfer investment would't have shown on the pitch. It's a strawman argument.

 

There are are also worse owners than both in the football pyramid. At least those 2 owners sometimes hit their minimum targets.

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Tiresias said:

I agree largely but even under Ashley we could have spent what he spent better with a good coach and been a lot more successful. This was the most baffling thing about his era, if he's appointed decent people to run the club, he could have left them too it, say you need to be self sustainable and money could have been spent on academy to generate saleable assets and never had to do anything with the club except take money out of it to fund his nights out. But he didn't, he sabotagued the club making any revenue, used us as an advertising board for shite direct and got involved in transfers. It was baffling.

But that's a core part of shit football leadership. Make sure you hire yes men in senior positions who won't challenge or rock the boat too much.

 

Nobody at Man U has been fired for a decade of underperformance. I think one dude is finally stepping down but that's it.

 

Charnley wasn't qualfiied for his job but he got it and kept it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, ManDoon said:

They will spend big on English lads under Lamps, then it will all fall apart. He will be the first manager to go next season imo

Or Hassenhutl, imo.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Everton will continue to be driven into the ground by that ownership.

 

What's happened to Usmanov, btw? Would that affect them in any way or are they owned mostly by Moshiri these days?

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, ManDoon said:

They will spend big on English lads under Lamps, then it will all fall apart. He will be the first manager to go next season imo

 

I was listening to a Villa podcast today and they were saying how Lampard said keeping them up was the biggest achievement of his career, and one of them pointed out that he'd managed to take over Everton when they were 16th and 4 points off the relegation places and guide them to, errr, 16th and 4 points off relegation.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, brummie said:

 

I was listening to a Villa podcast today and they were saying how Lampard said keeping them up was the biggest achievement of his career, and one of them pointed out that he'd managed to take over Everton when they were 16th and 4 points off the relegation places and guide them to, errr, 16th and 4 points off relegation.

 

 


Yeah, he basically did nothing. I have absolutely no doubt that Rafa would have got the required points eventually. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, ManDoon said:

They will spend big on English lads under Lamps, then it will all fall apart. He will be the first manager to go next season imo

I’d go for Marco Silva, his teams can’t defend.

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, brummie said:
23 minutes ago, ManDoon said:

They will spend big on English lads under Lamps, then it will all fall apart. He will be the first manager to go next season imo

 

I was listening to a Villa podcast today and they were saying how Lampard said keeping them up was the biggest achievement of his career, and one of them pointed out that he'd managed to take over Everton when they were 16th and 4 points off the relegation places and guide them to, errr, 16th and 4 points off relegation.

 

That is absolutely embarrassing. God he's a gobshite isn't he. 11 major honours with Chelsea including the Champions League, countless individual awards, well over a hundred England caps, even initially steering Chelsea through a difficult period was a decent achievement... but barely keeping Everton afloat despite them being comparatively well clear when he arrived, tops the lot? Insincere knobhead, so fucking glad we stayed well clear. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Him saying it was one of the biggest achievements of his career is an example of how he’s learned from one of the best managers in the business, Steve Bruce. The key is to make your audience believe you’re fighting against every adversity but you’ll continue scrapping because you love the club too much 

Link to post
Share on other sites

In fairness to Lampard, Everton had a hard run in but stayed up with a game to spare. As a warning going forward though, they clearly fluked some of the wins, the one against us included.

 

Maybe this greatest achievement BS is some "control the narrative" advice he's got from his uncle. who would come out with the same level of comment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, gbandit said:

Him saying it was one of the biggest achievements of his career is an example of how he’s learned from one of the best managers in the business, Steve Bruce. The key is to make your audience believe you’re fighting against every adversity but you’ll continue scrapping because you love the club too much 

 

I still wake up sometimes in a cold sweat and in my mind, I've seen Bruce do that 'world-weary, winking, self aggrandising' "That's the Championship" thing.

 

Fucking hell, I still feel sick if i think of that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...