Klaas Jan Huntelaar (27 Viewers)

Dominic

Senior Member
Jan 30, 2004
16,706
They only buy if others leave, Carrick was bought when Keane/Butt/Djemba somehting and others left or weren't good enough.
Ferdinand was bought when Stam left, Ronaldo was bought to replace Beckham, Rooney to replace Cole/Yorke/Solskjaer and so on.
They spent ther money wise and this season proved that.
They have money but they don't rely on it, or at least Ferguson doesn't want to so their finances don't play a big part in their achievemetns since they probably use like 15% of them for transfers.

Still got them nowhere in Europe. Take away that money, take away Vidic, Heinze, Evra, Ferdinand, Carrick, Ronaldo, Rooney. What a team you have left then?

Give that 15% to a team like PSV. See how far it'll bring them, they are already more of a force in Europe..

Besides, transfers isn't all of it. Man utd wouldn't have all their players either, if they had to pay half the salary costs.
 

Buy on AliExpress.com

V

Senior Member
Jun 8, 2005
20,110
  • V

    V

Still got them nowhere in Europe. Take away that money, take away Vidic, Heinze, Evra, Ferdinand, Carrick, Ronaldo, Rooney. What a team you have left then?

Give that 15% to a team like PSV. See how far it'll bring them, they are already more of a force in Europe..

Besides, transfers isn't all of it. Man utd wouldn't have all their players either, if they had to pay half the salary costs.
Why don't we take away their whole starting 11 while we're at it. :D

All those players were bought graduatelly, the team was built graduatelly, piece by piece. You make it seem like they have tons of money and they just bought it all once, which couldn't be further from the truth.

Give that money to anyone they'll surelly do good, but ManU earned that money with their history and then later on with fantastic marketing of their club and players(Beckham era). Yet again they don't use that money for buying superstars, they have a completelly different approach from other rich clubs so I don't see why their money is relevant since they hardly use it.
 

Oggy

and the Cockroaches
Dec 27, 2005
7,512
They only buy if others leave, Carrick was bought when Keane/Butt/Djemba somehting and others left or weren't good enough.
Ferdinand was bought when Stam left, Ronaldo was bought to replace Beckham, Rooney to replace Cole/Yorke/Solskjaer and so on.
They spent ther money wise and this season proved that.
That's the key word :faq1: They won't spend money if they don't need unlike Madrid and Chelsea.

And no one can call Manchester underachievers :disagree: If we gonna call them underachievers than what Juve is??? We have no better record than ManU, maybe we were in finals few years ago but we also was kicked out of group stage too something never happened to ManU...
 

Dominic

Senior Member
Jan 30, 2004
16,706
Why don't we take away their whole starting 11 while we're at it. :D
You joke, but yes we could if it wasn't for the money.

All those players were bought graduatelly, the team was built graduatelly, piece by piece. You make it seem like they have tons of money and they just bought it all once, which couldn't be further from the truth.
Even so, no matter how gradually it was, it was still only possible due to a high spending power.

Give that money to anyone they'll surelly do good, but ManU earned that money with their history and then later on with fantastic marketing of their club and players(Beckham era). Yet again they don't use that money for buying superstars, they have a completelly different approach from other rich clubs so I don't see why their money is relevant since they hardly use it.
As Turk pointed out, the pre-90'ies man u does not really have a great history. Money played the biggest part in their rise.


Anyway, we are going in circles. I suggest to agree to disagree.


That's the key word :faq1: They won't spend money if they don't need unlike Madrid and Chelsea.

And no one can call Manchester underachievers :disagree: If we gonna call them underachievers than what Juve is??? We have no better record than ManU, maybe we were in finals few years ago but we also was kicked out of group stage too something never happened to ManU...
Yes, no doubt about it. Juventus are European underachievers. Though we have been in a lot of finals, which makes up for it a bit.
 

Mike-e-y

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2004
11,188
You joke, but yes we could if it wasn't for the money.



Even so, no matter how gradually it was, it was still only possible due to a high spending power.



As Turk pointed out, the pre-90'ies man u does not really have a great history. Money played the biggest part in their rise.


Anyway, we are going in circles. I suggest to agree to disagree.




Yes, no doubt about it. Juventus are European underachievers. Though we have been in a lot of finals, which makes up for it a bit.

i really dont see what the problem with them having money is, man u have earned that money, its not like they got a oil tycoon to take them over a la chelsea. they literally had nothing when fergie took over and because of good management and wise buying they have earned each and every penny that the club now has, ok a lot of the success is down the the crazy talent tht came through the youth system : Giggs, Scholes, G + P Neville and Beckham but i dont see a problem with that, and they are not really underachievers, only in the last few years could they be remotely labeled as that.
 
Jul 2, 2006
19,435
That's the key word :faq1: They won't spend money if they don't need unlike Madrid and Chelsea.

And no one can call Manchester underachievers :disagree: If we gonna call them underachievers than what Juve is??? We have no better record than ManU, maybe we were in finals few years ago but we also was kicked out of group stage too something never happened to ManU...
naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!

they were kicked out of group stage last year dear man utd lover
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 27)