comment by sandy (U20567)
posted 38 minutes ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 17 minutes ago
6 actually.
However, in the last 6 years there have been 4 different winners, meaning the predictability has decreased compared to the first 12 years of PL football.
And a one in a million title win suggest great unpredictability....
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeh three chequebook clubs and Leicester, who will never win another Prem in their history. Really looks like a level playing field.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If it's so easy with a chequebook, Spurs would have dominated throughout the 60's, 70's and 80's.
I'm sure chequebook Poch will spend too Sandy, maybe the owners will give him some of the money they avoid giving the taxman by accidentally basing themselves in that part of N London called the Bahamas? I hear that clubs will be limited in spend to the amount they have invested in the area in which the club is based. That won't include fires.
Every manager is a 'cheque book' manager, using that cheque book wisely is part of the job, integrating them into the team, training, tactics etc isn't easy regardless of how big your cheque is.
comment by AFCISMYTEAM (U14931)
posted 1 second ago
Every manager is a 'cheque book' manager, using that cheque book wisely is part of the job, integrating them into the team, training, tactics etc isn't easy regardless of how big your cheque is.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly, Yaya has gone, Fernandinho is getting older so a DM is essential for a team that sets itself targets of winning 4 competitions. Not so convinced about Mahrez and £60m is a lot, even allowing for the 'PL winners tax' that a proven winner commands. Only other purchases I can see at City would be a replacement for Bravo as backup keeper and a big name if, and only if. PSG are forced into a firesale.
Getting the signings in early so they can integrate is vital. Also it has to be remembered that Pep is not the world's best for nothing, his teams play complex football that can rip opponents apart, Sandy will remember that from the games last season. That takes time to learn, he doesn't favour buying in August for that reason.
You need to read up on FFP to understand how Clubs can work things in their favour.
It is interesting to note how Man City have benefited from their rather calculated decision to classify Mancini's pay-off as 'wages' - this inflated the club wages and, assuming it isn't contested by the PL, would allow more scope for wage increases (if required). Of course, City have increased Commercial Income since 2013/14 (largely from state-influenced Abu Dhabi companies) so have additional capacity for wage increases in any event.
and of course the TV income has dropped dramatically hasn't it?
The Super Clubs (for want if a less cheesy expression) like Manchester City* have enormous incomes, the idea that they have to cheat FFP to spend money is ridiculous.
These Super Clubs are operated like any other large Corporation, they invest for the long term, and monetise every activity.
*I appreciate how hard it is for some to accept reality, but there you go.
Sheik Mansour has backed Spendiola with an almost unlimited budget, they have spent well over a billion on players and wages.
They get round the regulations with dodgy sponsorship deals, they effectively sponsor themselves to the tune of 100`s of millions.
They will buy the PL next season also, put your cash on them, it`s like printing money.
More stringent wage caps and transfer spending would be good.
I would like to see a law that each top flight club could only sign 1 U25 player each transfer window as well, would really let clubs develop their talent.
comment by Billy The Yidd (U3924)
posted 12 minutes ago
Sheik Mansour has backed Spendiola with an almost unlimited budget, they have spent well over a billion on players and wages.
They get round the regulations with dodgy sponsorship deals, they effectively sponsor themselves to the tune of 100`s of millions.
They will buy the PL next season also, put your cash on them, it`s like printing money.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You are 10 years out of date.
Arguably, the deals with Etihad look extremely cheap now.
The Etihad deal is vastly undervalued in the current market but money is invested in the club and the surrounding area. East Manchester was fairly rundown, a bit like some areas of N London, but largely thanks to City owners it has been transformed. Instead of taking money out of the club and the area and tax sheltering money say in the Bahamas, others could do that as well as investing in the team they own.
Most the 'reinvestment' in the Man City has come by way of the Sheikhs one way or the other though.
comment by AFCISMYTEAM (U14931)
posted 1 hour, 22 minutes ago
Every manager is a 'cheque book' manager, using that cheque book wisely is part of the job, integrating them into the team, training, tactics etc isn't easy regardless of how big your cheque is.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Total bollox, Man City are completely distorting the market in their favour with their obscene wages and spending, because they are being bankrolled by a small country.
Not sure what that has to do with buying early, as opposed to doing a deal on transfer deadline day in the hope that it can be done on the cheap but then wondering why the season is 2 months old before the signings gel. That is the difference between the world's best and the rest.
comment by ------- (U21614)
posted 1 hour, 28 minutes ago
comment by sandy (U20567)
posted 38 minutes ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 17 minutes ago
6 actually.
However, in the last 6 years there have been 4 different winners, meaning the predictability has decreased compared to the first 12 years of PL football.
And a one in a million title win suggest great unpredictability....
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeh three chequebook clubs and Leicester, who will never win another Prem in their history. Really looks like a level playing field.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If it's so easy with a chequebook, Spurs would have dominated throughout the 60's, 70's and 80's.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeh like Spurs had the sort of money at their disposal that City had. Spurs were a half decent side for a fair bit of those three decades on an OK amount of money, no more, no less than most other clubs. City were absolutely useless until the sugar daddy came along, big difference.
comment by Robbing_Hoody - If he asked me to I would move to Egypt just to iron Salah's socks. (U6374)
posted 2 hours, 13 minutes ago
Don't see the problem with it tbh
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There is a major problem with City distorting the transfer market, that is why you had to pay £85 million for a very average central defender, because City keep on pushing up the value of players with their seemingly never ending wreckless spending spree.
Robbing how are you pal ?
What is City's transfer record spend then Sandy? Tell us all how that is pushing up fees.
comment by GeniusGreaves (U1302)
posted 1 hour, 4 minutes ago
You need to read up on FFP to understand how Clubs can work things in their favour.
It is interesting to note how Man City have benefited from their rather calculated decision to classify Mancini's pay-off as 'wages' - this inflated the club wages and, assuming it isn't contested by the PL, would allow more scope for wage increases (if required). Of course, City have increased Commercial Income since 2013/14 (largely from state-influenced Abu Dhabi companies) so have additional capacity for wage increases in any event.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No we haven’t, our two biggest new sponsors since the ffp sanction are Nexen and BT. We also raised most of the revenue for new players from the sale of 13% to Chinese investors.
We’ve also changed our entire wage structure, that’s why Soriano was brought in, to be more aligned to Barcelona’s model of heavily bonus incentivised.
Of course Mancini’s wage won’t be contested by the pl, it was three years ago, those accounts have been through and assessed ages ago.
comment by sandy (U20567)
posted 23 minutes ago
comment by ------- (U21614)
posted 1 hour, 28 minutes ago
comment by sandy (U20567)
posted 38 minutes ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 17 minutes ago
6 actually.
However, in the last 6 years there have been 4 different winners, meaning the predictability has decreased compared to the first 12 years of PL football.
And a one in a million title win suggest great unpredictability....
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeh three chequebook clubs and Leicester, who will never win another Prem in their history. Really looks like a level playing field.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If it's so easy with a chequebook, Spurs would have dominated throughout the 60's, 70's and 80's.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeh like Spurs had the sort of money at their disposal that City had. Spurs were a half decent side for a fair bit of those three decades on an OK amount of money, no more, no less than most other clubs. City were absolutely useless until the sugar daddy came along, big difference.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Spending 100k for a player in 1961 was huge and no club could pull it off without external help, for perspective some clubs couldn't afford staff to sort their post out at that time.
Spending 100k for a player in 1961 was huge and no club could pull it off without external help, for perspective some clubs couldn't afford staff to sort their post out at that time.
————————
But Spurs didn’t spend £100,000 in 1961 on a player did they?
It was actually £99,999 as Bill Nicholson did not want Jimmy Greaves to have the burden of being the first £100,000 player
What is City's transfer record please Sandy?
There needs to be wage caps and caps on agents fees, this will stop clubs like £ity inflating wages to the point that only themselves and a select few can afford to pay them and the agents will then be less keen to turn their clients heads as they chase another big payday.
The problem with wage caps is that the best players will simply go elsewhere. Agents should all be jailed as far as most fans are concerned. Should be a ban on owners who are tax dodgers.
Sign in if you want to comment
I see chequebook Pep is spending
Page 2 of 4
posted on 31/5/18
comment by sandy (U20567)
posted 38 minutes ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 17 minutes ago
6 actually.
However, in the last 6 years there have been 4 different winners, meaning the predictability has decreased compared to the first 12 years of PL football.
And a one in a million title win suggest great unpredictability....
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeh three chequebook clubs and Leicester, who will never win another Prem in their history. Really looks like a level playing field.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If it's so easy with a chequebook, Spurs would have dominated throughout the 60's, 70's and 80's.
posted on 31/5/18
I'm sure chequebook Poch will spend too Sandy, maybe the owners will give him some of the money they avoid giving the taxman by accidentally basing themselves in that part of N London called the Bahamas? I hear that clubs will be limited in spend to the amount they have invested in the area in which the club is based. That won't include fires.
posted on 31/5/18
Every manager is a 'cheque book' manager, using that cheque book wisely is part of the job, integrating them into the team, training, tactics etc isn't easy regardless of how big your cheque is.
posted on 31/5/18
comment by AFCISMYTEAM (U14931)
posted 1 second ago
Every manager is a 'cheque book' manager, using that cheque book wisely is part of the job, integrating them into the team, training, tactics etc isn't easy regardless of how big your cheque is.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly, Yaya has gone, Fernandinho is getting older so a DM is essential for a team that sets itself targets of winning 4 competitions. Not so convinced about Mahrez and £60m is a lot, even allowing for the 'PL winners tax' that a proven winner commands. Only other purchases I can see at City would be a replacement for Bravo as backup keeper and a big name if, and only if. PSG are forced into a firesale.
Getting the signings in early so they can integrate is vital. Also it has to be remembered that Pep is not the world's best for nothing, his teams play complex football that can rip opponents apart, Sandy will remember that from the games last season. That takes time to learn, he doesn't favour buying in August for that reason.
posted on 31/5/18
You need to read up on FFP to understand how Clubs can work things in their favour.
It is interesting to note how Man City have benefited from their rather calculated decision to classify Mancini's pay-off as 'wages' - this inflated the club wages and, assuming it isn't contested by the PL, would allow more scope for wage increases (if required). Of course, City have increased Commercial Income since 2013/14 (largely from state-influenced Abu Dhabi companies) so have additional capacity for wage increases in any event.
posted on 31/5/18
and of course the TV income has dropped dramatically hasn't it?
posted on 31/5/18
The Super Clubs (for want if a less cheesy expression) like Manchester City* have enormous incomes, the idea that they have to cheat FFP to spend money is ridiculous.
These Super Clubs are operated like any other large Corporation, they invest for the long term, and monetise every activity.
*I appreciate how hard it is for some to accept reality, but there you go.
posted on 31/5/18
Sheik Mansour has backed Spendiola with an almost unlimited budget, they have spent well over a billion on players and wages.
They get round the regulations with dodgy sponsorship deals, they effectively sponsor themselves to the tune of 100`s of millions.
They will buy the PL next season also, put your cash on them, it`s like printing money.
posted on 31/5/18
More stringent wage caps and transfer spending would be good.
I would like to see a law that each top flight club could only sign 1 U25 player each transfer window as well, would really let clubs develop their talent.
posted on 31/5/18
comment by Billy The Yidd (U3924)
posted 12 minutes ago
Sheik Mansour has backed Spendiola with an almost unlimited budget, they have spent well over a billion on players and wages.
They get round the regulations with dodgy sponsorship deals, they effectively sponsor themselves to the tune of 100`s of millions.
They will buy the PL next season also, put your cash on them, it`s like printing money.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You are 10 years out of date.
Arguably, the deals with Etihad look extremely cheap now.
posted on 31/5/18
The Etihad deal is vastly undervalued in the current market but money is invested in the club and the surrounding area. East Manchester was fairly rundown, a bit like some areas of N London, but largely thanks to City owners it has been transformed. Instead of taking money out of the club and the area and tax sheltering money say in the Bahamas, others could do that as well as investing in the team they own.
posted on 31/5/18
Most the 'reinvestment' in the Man City has come by way of the Sheikhs one way or the other though.
posted on 31/5/18
comment by AFCISMYTEAM (U14931)
posted 1 hour, 22 minutes ago
Every manager is a 'cheque book' manager, using that cheque book wisely is part of the job, integrating them into the team, training, tactics etc isn't easy regardless of how big your cheque is.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Total bollox, Man City are completely distorting the market in their favour with their obscene wages and spending, because they are being bankrolled by a small country.
posted on 31/5/18
Not sure what that has to do with buying early, as opposed to doing a deal on transfer deadline day in the hope that it can be done on the cheap but then wondering why the season is 2 months old before the signings gel. That is the difference between the world's best and the rest.
posted on 31/5/18
comment by ------- (U21614)
posted 1 hour, 28 minutes ago
comment by sandy (U20567)
posted 38 minutes ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 17 minutes ago
6 actually.
However, in the last 6 years there have been 4 different winners, meaning the predictability has decreased compared to the first 12 years of PL football.
And a one in a million title win suggest great unpredictability....
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeh three chequebook clubs and Leicester, who will never win another Prem in their history. Really looks like a level playing field.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If it's so easy with a chequebook, Spurs would have dominated throughout the 60's, 70's and 80's.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeh like Spurs had the sort of money at their disposal that City had. Spurs were a half decent side for a fair bit of those three decades on an OK amount of money, no more, no less than most other clubs. City were absolutely useless until the sugar daddy came along, big difference.
posted on 31/5/18
comment by Robbing_Hoody - If he asked me to I would move to Egypt just to iron Salah's socks. (U6374)
posted 2 hours, 13 minutes ago
Don't see the problem with it tbh
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There is a major problem with City distorting the transfer market, that is why you had to pay £85 million for a very average central defender, because City keep on pushing up the value of players with their seemingly never ending wreckless spending spree.
posted on 31/5/18
Robbing how are you pal ?
posted on 31/5/18
What is City's transfer record spend then Sandy? Tell us all how that is pushing up fees.
posted on 31/5/18
comment by GeniusGreaves (U1302)
posted 1 hour, 4 minutes ago
You need to read up on FFP to understand how Clubs can work things in their favour.
It is interesting to note how Man City have benefited from their rather calculated decision to classify Mancini's pay-off as 'wages' - this inflated the club wages and, assuming it isn't contested by the PL, would allow more scope for wage increases (if required). Of course, City have increased Commercial Income since 2013/14 (largely from state-influenced Abu Dhabi companies) so have additional capacity for wage increases in any event.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No we haven’t, our two biggest new sponsors since the ffp sanction are Nexen and BT. We also raised most of the revenue for new players from the sale of 13% to Chinese investors.
We’ve also changed our entire wage structure, that’s why Soriano was brought in, to be more aligned to Barcelona’s model of heavily bonus incentivised.
Of course Mancini’s wage won’t be contested by the pl, it was three years ago, those accounts have been through and assessed ages ago.
posted on 31/5/18
comment by sandy (U20567)
posted 23 minutes ago
comment by ------- (U21614)
posted 1 hour, 28 minutes ago
comment by sandy (U20567)
posted 38 minutes ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 17 minutes ago
6 actually.
However, in the last 6 years there have been 4 different winners, meaning the predictability has decreased compared to the first 12 years of PL football.
And a one in a million title win suggest great unpredictability....
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeh three chequebook clubs and Leicester, who will never win another Prem in their history. Really looks like a level playing field.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If it's so easy with a chequebook, Spurs would have dominated throughout the 60's, 70's and 80's.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeh like Spurs had the sort of money at their disposal that City had. Spurs were a half decent side for a fair bit of those three decades on an OK amount of money, no more, no less than most other clubs. City were absolutely useless until the sugar daddy came along, big difference.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Spending 100k for a player in 1961 was huge and no club could pull it off without external help, for perspective some clubs couldn't afford staff to sort their post out at that time.
posted on 31/5/18
Spending 100k for a player in 1961 was huge and no club could pull it off without external help, for perspective some clubs couldn't afford staff to sort their post out at that time.
————————
But Spurs didn’t spend £100,000 in 1961 on a player did they?
posted on 31/5/18
It was actually £99,999 as Bill Nicholson did not want Jimmy Greaves to have the burden of being the first £100,000 player
posted on 31/5/18
What is City's transfer record please Sandy?
posted on 31/5/18
There needs to be wage caps and caps on agents fees, this will stop clubs like £ity inflating wages to the point that only themselves and a select few can afford to pay them and the agents will then be less keen to turn their clients heads as they chase another big payday.
posted on 31/5/18
The problem with wage caps is that the best players will simply go elsewhere. Agents should all be jailed as far as most fans are concerned. Should be a ban on owners who are tax dodgers.
Page 2 of 4