Robin Van Persie - Forward - Arsenal (7 Viewers)

[DelPieroTen]

I think if you were being honest with yourself you'd acknowledge the fact that the only reason your club is anywhere now is because of the money... i'm not having a go though, it's not like you should be guilty that someone came in and bought all these great players. I've had a soft spot for Man City ever since the days of Kinkladze etc.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[BlakeTheBlue]

I think if you were being honest with yourself you'd acknowledge the fact that the only reason your club is anywhere now is because of the money... i'm not having a go though, it's not like you should be guilty that someone came in and bought all these great players. I've had a soft spot for Man City ever since the days of Kinkladze etc.

Ofcourse. We all accept that and i hope the tone of my post doesn't appear to suggest otherwise. Rollie was suggesting that the only reason a player like RVP would even consider joining City was for the money. My point was that City have way more to offer a player than just the financial benefits. And to say we are just an ego driven Sheikhs play thing is both insulting and complete and utter nonesense. If the people who thought this garbage knew even half of what Sheiknh Mansour has planned for City they would stfu. But they rant bitter nonesense without any frame of reference whatsoever.

 

[Ironz]

Ofcourse. We all accept that and i hope the tone of my post doesn't appear to suggest otherwise. Rollie was suggesting that the only reason a player like RVP would even consider joining City was for the money. My point was that City have way more to offer a player than just the financial benefits. And to say we are just an ego driven Sheikhs play thing is both insulting and complete and utter nonesense. If the people who thought this garbage knew even half of what Sheiknh Mansour has planned for City they would stfu. But they rant bitter nonesense without any frame ofreference whatsoever.

Think the bin man had arrived to collect my rubbish or maybe it's this post that stinks I don't know. Listen, every club has a plan. Yours is to over pay over price everyone beyond belief.

 

[BlakeTheBlue]

Kompany, Tevez, Aguero, Silva, Yaya, Lescott, Zabaletta, etc etc and on and on and on. How much do you think these players are worth on the open market? i guarantee it's more than we first payed. for many their value has doubled. It's ignorant replies like yours that prove how many people just haven't got a clue. It's so fasionable to bash City. We payed £6M for komapny. £7M for Clichy... Nobody mentions the bargains though do they. They don't fit in with the fools view of the MCFC model.

If we overpayed on a few in the early days it is because we had no other choice. We had to do it to catch up with the top clubs. The idoitic view point that City drives up the price for other clubs is moronic. 99% of other clubs aren't in for the same players we are. Do you think West Brom will want more for a player they are selling to Stoke just because City payed £30M the day before for somebody? don't be silly. We have the ability to out bid most clubs that are in competition for the same player as us and THAT is what bothers them. How hypocritical. The traditional big clubs have done that for years. Now there's Tears when City do it? LOL.

 

[Klovn]

Go all in on this guy.

 

[Jem83]

It has nothing to do with being "fashionable to bash City". City is a small club, a small club that recently got rich. There's no way around that. It's gonna take you guys decades to gain the status that clubs in the old guard of the european football aristocracy have. This is not something you gain due to suddenly becoming champions. Roma and Lazio won the Serie-A in the early 2000s, so what? Even then, everyone knew who the biggest italian clubs were, just like everyone in the world knows that it's Manchester United, Liverpool, Arsenal etc. in England.

That said, you're right about one thing. A player considering joining City is not only thinking about the money (although it's obviously a very important factor in his decision), but he'll also be considering the sporting 'project' that is in place, and whether or not he'd fit in etc.

However, if you honestly believe that i.e. Sergio Aguero would've joined you guys without the sheik's money, you are delusional.

 

[BlakeTheBlue]

It has nothing to do with being "fashionable to bash City". City is a small club, a small club that recently got rich. There's no way around that. It's gonna take you guys decades to gain the status that clubs in the old guard of the european football aristocracy have. This is not something you gain due to suddenly becoming champions. Roma and Lazio won the Serie-A in the early 2000s, so what? Even then, everyone knew who the biggest italian clubs were, just like everyone in the world knows that it's Manchester United, Liverpool, Arsenal etc. in England.

That said, you're right about one thing. A player considering joining City is not only thinking about the money (although it's obviously a very important factor in his decision), but he'll also be considering the sporting 'project' that is in place, and whether or not he'd fit in etc.

However, if you honestly believe that i.e. Sergio Aguero would've joined you guys without the sheik's money, you are delusional.

You know what. I'd much rather not be considered one of the "historic giants of football". Fu*ck that, i don't want that status. The arrogance that goes along with it is staggering. Every other club is deemed "small lucky clubs". Well i'd much rather steer clear of that mentality. it's as if nobody else has any right to challange. As if there is a set model that has to be adhered to. IE grow organicly by developing great young players and competeing at the top. It's a fairy story which we all know is complete nonesense. Any time a so called "Smaller" club has even a single decent prospect that might help them develop he is poached by your vaunted "Historic Giant clubs"... It's impossible to grow that way and it has been for over 20 years.

In modern football if these "smaller clubs" want to compete for honours there has to be huge outside financial investment. Simple really. Why do you think Uefa want to bring in their dodgey ffp rules? To save clubs from themselves? To savew them from the danger of financial difficulties down the line like Pompey and Leeds? Because that's what they say. But the glaring truth is that they don't want these so called smaller clubs gate crashing their elite little party so they are trying to protect their established status quo.

 

[Jem83]

First of all, good for you that you don't want the status of being a "historical giant of football", because you're never gonna get it.

Second of all, everyone should be able to challenge, but I'd rather see them come up and f*ck up the established status quo the way Leeds did it in 1992 and Kaiserslautern did it in 1998. Valencia, Roma and Lazio in the early 2000s should also be mentioned. They did it through careful and meticulous sporting and financial planning.

Yes, you need to invest pretty heavily to be succesful these days, but there's a difference between doing that, and the insane economic doping that MCFC represents.

 

[Alen]

It has nothing to do with being "fashionable to bash City". City is a small club, a small club that recently got rich. There's no way around that. It's gonna take you guys decades to gain the status that clubs in the old guard of the european football aristocracy have. This is not something you gain due to suddenly becoming champions. Roma and Lazio won the Serie-A in the early 2000s, so what? Even then, everyone knew who the biggest italian clubs were, just like everyone in the world knows that it's Manchester United, Liverpool, Arsenal etc. in England.

It depends on the success. It might take them less. Chelsea for example are getting really close to that status and it's less than 10 years since Roman bought the club. One more CL win for Chelsea, 3-4 more EPL titles and there they are.

And indeed, City are still a small club. No difference whatsoever between them and PSG for now.

 

[Jem83]

It depends on the success. It might take them less. Chelsea for example are getting really close to that status and it's less than 10 years since Roman bought the club. One more CL win for Chelsea, 3-4 more EPL titles and there they are.

And indeed, City are still a small club. No difference whatsoever between them and PSG for now.

I definitely see your point Alen, but what I've just highlighted there, I think is gonna take them at least another 10 years, probably 15 and hopefully even more.

Another point that must be made is that Chelsea was a bigger club before the Abramovich-takover than City was before their takeover.

Edit: the "probably 15 and hopefully even more"-part might seem very optimistic, I realize this, but hey, I have faith in United

 

[Ironz]

Keep buying titles, you deserve it. No hard work just throw money week in week out and be done with. Wahey!! Know what I'd rather have.

---------- Post added 28.07.2012 at 15:50 ----------

Go all in on this guy.

Div!

 

[Alen]

I definitely see your point Alen, but what I've just highlighted there, I think is gonna take them at least another 10 years, probably 15 and hopefully even more.

Another point that must be made is that Chelsea was a bigger club before the Abramovich-takover than City was before their takeover.

Edit: the "probably 15 and hopefully even more"-part might seem very optimistic, I realize this, but hey, I have faith in United

It also helped that 2 of the 3 greatest post-Abramovich legends were actually home grown players or bought before Roman came (Terry, Lampard).

 

[Emmet]

First of all, good for you that you don't want the status of being a "historical giant of football", because you're never gonna get it.

Second of all, everyone should be able to challenge, but I'd rather see them come up and f*ck up the established status quo the way Leeds did it in 1992 and Kaiserslautern did it in 1998. Valencia, Roma and Lazio in the early 2000s should also be mentioned. They did it through careful and meticulous sporting and financial planning.

Yes, you need to invest pretty heavily to be succesful these days, but there's a difference between doing that, and the insane economic doping that MCFC represents.

To be fair Lazio threw around alot of money in the late 90s/early 00s. Cragnotti was an italian version of Abramovich in them days.

 

[DelPieroTen]

Kompany, Tevez, Aguero, Silva, Yaya, Lescott, Zabaletta, etc etc and on and on and on. How much do you think these players are worth on the open market? i guarantee it's more than we first payed. for many their value has doubled....

...The idoitic view point that City drives up the price for other clubs is moronic...

You've made some decent points about some of the bargains City have got. Vincent Kompany is probably the best signing considering his worth to the team. He also seems like a top pro and actually has a respect for the club that a few of the other players don't have.

I'd disagree about Tevez. His value is significantly less than it was when you signed him. Hence why you had difficulties offloading him in January. And Joleon Lescott? He was, is, will never be worth £23 million...


Your other point about City driving up prices isn't idiotic. It's not simply City, Chelsea have done it previously and PSG are doing it now. These teams have created an imbalance in the market. For a while, and the media don't help with this, it seemed City were linked with everyone. When clubs know that they are dealing with City they want the bigger fee and expect it.

What you see happening now is that a lot of clubs are looking for the big City-PSG fee for their players, regardless of what club is it. You are seeing situations like Luka Modric at Spurs and Real Madrid. Tottenham are quite rightly holding out for £35 million because they'll be looking at fees for other players of inferior quality going for much more, in relative terms.

Players have one or two good seasons these days and they are somehow worth £35 million and the fact is there aren't many clubs able to pay that kinda money.

 

[Jem83]

It also helped that 2 of the 3 greatest post-Abramovich legends were actually home grown players or bought before Roman came (Terry, Lampard).

Indeed.

To be fair Lazio threw around alot of money in the late 90s/early 00s. Cragnotti was an italian version of Abramovich in them days.

But it was pretty far from the stuff City, Chelski and PSG are doing.

Remember also that Lazio received a lot of cash from player sales, notably Veron to Manchester United, Nedved to Juventus and Nesta to Milan.

 

[Xperd]

Remember also that Lazio received a lot of cash from player sales, notably Veron to Manchester United, Nedved to Juventus and Nesta to Milan.

That was when they were cash strapped i.e when Lazio's president was caught in a scandal..They were in dire need of money at that point of time..

---------- Post added 28.07.2012 at 20:42 ----------

Lazio were also doing a 'City/PSG' but on a smaller scale..

Tbf atleast PSG are building a team..I mean look at their signings,they've assembled a pretty good team whereas you look at City and they want to buy every striker on the planet and their coach is still not satisfied..I mean at one point they had something like 10 strikers in their squad ..Now that is abnormal spending especially when it is not the greatest priority of your team

 

[DelPieroTen]

PSG have been a bit more successful in luring the really top players early. Ibrahimovic, Silva and Lavezzi are top drawer signings.

City were buying the likes of Roque Santa Cruz... Chelsea, Mateja Kezman lol

 

[Xperd]

PSG have been a bit more successful in luring the really top players early. Ibrahimovic, Silva and Lavezzi are top drawer signings.

City were buying the likes of Roque Santa Cruz... Chelsea, Mateja Kezman lol

And that is because teams were inclined to sell..PSG just took advantage of serie A teams' crippled financial situation..Otherwise they would've been left with mediocre buys on hefty fees as well..Though tbh they have been a bit more wise on the market than City,building an all round team rather than just buy 2-3 top strikers just to market their brand along with jersey sales and all..

 

[Bianconero_Aus]

To be fair Lazio threw around alot of money in the late 90s/early 00s. Cragnotti was an italian version of Abramovich in them days.

True that. Fuck Lazio had a top team back then, so many cool players. Really fun team.

 

[Maddy]

PSG have been a bit more successful in luring the really top players early. Ibrahimovic, Silva and Lavezzi are top drawer signings.

City were buying the likes of Roque Santa Cruz... Chelsea, Mateja Kezman lol

Meh, no. Look at what players City have signed since being a CL team and compare them to PSG's from this summer. Then compare who PSG signed before qualifying for CL with who City signed. Now look at whom Chelsea signed in the summer of 2003. Quite impressive signings.