Other Games 22/23

[PaddockLad 17252]

2 minutes ago, wykikitoon said:

Odd Tweet that mind. Some Alkmaar fans jump into to smash West Ham fans. THen some players try and calm down the situation and its that thats highlighted.

Think the Alkmaar mob barged into the section with the WH players’ families in it..

[LondonBlue 772]

1 hour ago, Alex said:

There was a Man City fan on 606 saying they’d rather win the FA Cup this year because it’s Man Utd in the final. He was saying there’s never been an all Manchester FA Cup final and it could be decades before there’s another one. To be honest I think they’ll win the lot from here but if it was us I think a lot of us would reason along similar lines. 

to be honest i feel the same way. My priorities this season (as of now) are

1. FA Cup - smallest trophy but the rags factor pushes its bragging rights value through the roof

2. Premier League - always the priority and after reeling the gunners in it would be a nightmare to lose it now

3. Champions League - Its a monkey we need to get off our back but aside from that, it's usually second choice

 

 

[LondonBlue 772]

 

Swiss Ramble have lots of good articles, you might like this one as it should give you an insight on the money you're likely to get from the Champions League next season

 

 

[Rayvin 5219]

38 minutes ago, LondonBlue said:

to be honest i feel the same way. My priorities this season (as of now) are

1. FA Cup - smallest trophy but the rags factor pushes its bragging rights value through the roof

2. Premier League - always the priority and after reeling the gunners in it would be a nightmare to lose it now

3. Champions League - Its a monkey we need to get off our back but aside from that, it's usually second choice

 

 

 

I'm a bit surprised by that tbh - I would have thought the CL would be the absolute pinnacle for you? I'm personally really hoping that you manage it as I think Guardiola has earned it for what he's achieved this season.

[Alex 35077]

13 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

I'm a bit surprised by that tbh - I would have thought the CL would be the absolute pinnacle for you? I'm personally really hoping that you manage it as I think Guardiola has earned it for what he's achieved this season.

CL over the league I’d imagine, if we’d never won the former and had won 4 out of the last 5 titles, or whatever it is. But us v Sunderland in the cup final? I think my heart would rule my head 

[OTF 7295]

Mind you it's probably very easy to prioritise when you'll be resounding favourites for each and are most likely to win them all.

[Howmanheyman 33173]

Apart from the football factor, I just couldn't imagine a derby at Wembley. It would be sheer mayhem. 

[LondonBlue 772]

1 hour ago, Rayvin said:

 

I'm a bit surprised by that tbh - I would have thought the CL would be the absolute pinnacle for you? I'm personally really hoping that you manage it as I think Guardiola has earned it for what he's achieved this season.

 

Don't get me wrong. I desperately want to win all 3.

 

In any normal season, I think just about any city fan will say premier league over champions league. But they'll also caveat that with getting the champions league won for the first time to stop people holding it against us.

 

Also city fans hate uefa and their witch hunt. that's why we boo the champions league anthem every single time. charging us with zero actual evidence (even the time barred charges had no evidence) no wonder we don't co-operate. grrr need to get back in my box!

 

[Rayvin 5219]

Just now, LondonBlue said:

 

Don't get me wrong. I desperately want to win all 3.

 

In any normal season, I think just about any city fan will say premier league over champions league. But they'll also caveat that with getting the champions league won for the first time to stop people holding it against us.

 

Also city fans hate uefa and their witch hunt. that's why we boo the champions league anthem every single time. charging us with zero actual evidence (even the time barred charges had no evidence) no wonder we don't co-operate. grrr need to get back in my box!

 

 

I guess coming from the perspective of never having won either, I find it hard to imagine this reality

 

Maybe I'm over egging it, but I believed the CL was a much grander accomplishment than the PL. I suppose in different ways perhaps, but still. The best teams in history are remembered for winning in Europe, not the league - I think this will be a defining trophy for you.

[LondonBlue 772]

1 hour ago, OTF said:

Mind you it's probably very easy to prioritise when you'll be resounding favourites for each and are most likely to win them all.

 

We've won nothing yet. 

 

( it's very hard to shake the old pessimistic accepting of defeat outlook. you'll understand t feeling soon enough! )

[LondonBlue 772]

1 minute ago, Rayvin said:

 

I guess coming from the perspective of never having won either, I find it hard to imagine this reality

 

Maybe I'm over egging it, but I believed the CL was a much grander accomplishment than the PL. I suppose in different ways perhaps, but still. The best teams in history are remembered for winning in Europe, not the league - I think this will be a defining trophy for you.

 

I agree. But if the premier league is the cake then the CL is just a big fat cherry on top.

 

[LondonBlue 772]

Here's another bug bear that the media ignore when talking about state owned and outspending everyone. We don't spend more. We spend less.

 

https://www.football365.com/news/transfers-premier-league-five-year-net-spend-man-utd-man-city

 

 

[Holden McGroin 6583]

Yeah,  although I think when you're established and winning leagues you can sell your players that you want to offload for about the same as you want to spend.

 

We've spent so much as we had zero sellable players.

 

I take your point though. Very rarely gets mentioned how much Man U etc have spent.

 

[RobinRobin 11263]

2 hours ago, Alex said:

 Sunderland in the cup final? 

[Alex 35077]

2 minutes ago, RobinRobin said:

#imagine

[OTF 7295]

19 minutes ago, Holden McGroin said:

Yeah,  although I think when you're established and winning leagues you can sell your players that you want to offload for about the same as you want to spend.

 

We've spent so much as we had zero sellable players.

 

I take your point though. Very rarely gets mentioned how much Man U etc have spent.

 

 

Those figures are pointless. And separate to this they have some very good lawyers. I don't begrudge them at all but Man City have the best squad in the world because they spent a shitload of money assembling it and even more paying for it (wages). They have the best manager in the world, head and shoulders above all others, who is there because he's (rightfully) been given free reign. Like I said they're favourites in every game they play.

 

That doesn't mean that you only need to spend loads of money to be a top team, you can spend loads without proper leadership and be Manu or Chelsea.

[Alex 35077]

3 hours ago, LondonBlue said:

 

Swiss Ramble have lots of good articles, you might like this one as it should give you an insight on the money you're likely to get from the Champions League next season

 

 

Swiss Ramble stuff is good. It’s obviously a bit of a dry subject but it’s nice to actually read someone who knows what they’re talking about on that side of things. 

[Rayvin 5219]

4 minutes ago, OTF said:

 

Those figures are pointless. And separate to this they have some very good lawyers. I don't begrudge them at all but Man City have the best squad in the world because they spent a shitload of money assembling it and even more paying for it (wages). They have the best manager in the world, head and shoulders above all others, who is there because he's (rightfully) been given free reign. Like I said they're favourites in every game they play.

 

That doesn't mean that you only need to spend loads of money to be a top team, you can spend loads without proper leadership and be Manu or Chelsea.

 

Aye, this - also City spent the lions share of their money further back in time. It seems like it's possible to remain competitive at a lower and more sustainable level once you have that established foundation, but it takes a lot of expenditure to get up to it.

 

Man Utd and Chelsea consistently overspend because they only believe in the galactico approach to buying players, not the team building one.

[LondonBlue 772]

5 minutes ago, OTF said:

 

Those figures are pointless. And separate to this they have some very good lawyers. I don't begrudge them at all but Man City have the best squad in the world because they spent a shitload of money assembling it and even more paying for it (wages). They have the best manager in the world, head and shoulders above all others, who is there because he's (rightfully) been given free reign. Like I said they're favourites in every game they play.

 

That doesn't mean that you only need to spend loads of money to be a top team, you can spend loads without proper leadership and be Manu or Chelsea.

 

Uefa can afford good lawyers too. Point is they had no evidence. The CAS report states that quite clearly. We were fined for not responding quickly enough. So when people say CAS found us guilty, they did, but not for cheating.

We were the turkey that didn't vote for christmas, naughty us. 

 

I'm fairly sure the same will happen with the premier league charges. Some of which are for rules introduced after the they were supposedly broken. Tricky bit is that a platinum season ticket arsenal fan is going to be passing judgement.

 

People are always amazed that we got so much sponsorship from the UAE in the early days. But why wouldn't companies want to be linked to their own royal family, great exposure for them.

 

Anyway the press will ramp the focus more on you once you start winning things...

 

[LondonBlue 772]

8 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

Aye, this - also City spent the lions share of their money further back in time. It seems like it's possible to remain competitive at a lower and more sustainable level once you have that established foundation, but it takes a lot of expenditure to get up to it.

 

Man Utd and Chelsea consistently overspend because they only believe in the galactico approach to buying players, not the team building one.

 

i agree with this.

 

major spend to get there, then whilst you're successful the spend drops.

 

not sure we've done the dirty tricks that used to be standard. like the old ryan giggs one. he was on our books, then switched to man united around the time his mum and dads kitchen was fitted out with all the latest white goods. just a coincidence of course.

 

 

[LondonBlue 772]

50 minutes ago, LondonBlue said:

 

i agree with this.

 

major spend to get there, then whilst you're successful the spend drops.

 

not sure we've done the dirty tricks that used to be standard. like the old ryan giggs one. he was on our books, then switched to man united around the time his mum and dads kitchen was fitted out with all the latest white goods. just a coincidence of course.

 

 

 

when nicky butt signed for united his dad drove away from the swamp with a brand new mercedes

 

[Ayatollah Hermione 13863]

1 hour ago, Rayvin said:

 

I guess coming from the perspective of never having won either, I find it hard to imagine this reality

 

Maybe I'm over egging it, but I believed the CL was a much grander accomplishment than the PL. I suppose in different ways perhaps, but still. The best teams in history are remembered for winning in Europe, not the league - I think this will be a defining trophy for you.

The CL is probably the thing that you’re remembered for as a club side and it’s probably what the players want to win these days but winning the Premier League these days is a ridiculous achievement. The quality is incredible these days and it’s relentless 

[LondonBlue 772]

 

Lifted this from a fellow City fan. A different perspective on relative value of players over the years. Basically expressing the cost of a player as a percentage on the league income. Obvious flaws but still interesting

 

Quote

Historically in PL transfers, the highest transfer fees on average, sit at around 10% of the total league transfer income for the year. This rule has remained quite consistent throughout the PL era. It was understandable when most teams in England would buy players off each other, but this rule remains true even now, when many buy from abroad. It gives a good indication as to what players from the past would’ve roughly cost today, and also how expensive a top player actually should be, in the current market climate right now. For example, last year, the league combined received £860M in transfer fees, the top signings Nunez was £85M, so 10% of the total received, Anthony £90M just over 10% and Enzo Fernandez came in at about 12%. Year on year there’s also a consistent trend from around 1993 that the total transfer income of the league x 2 is usually what is spent out. The league as a whole spend more money than they receive in transfers every year.

 

To give you some context from the past, in 1993 Utd broke the British transfer record fee for Roy Keane at around £4M. The entire league made just over £60M that year in transfers, so this deal was 8% of that total.

 

In 1994 a year later, Utd broke the record transfer again for Andy Cole, this time for nearly double the amount of Keane, at around £7M. But the entire league received more, and this one deal worked out at around 10% compared with the transfer income.

 

In 1995, Arsenal broke the record with the signing of Bergkamp for £7.5M, which was at 9% of the total. Liverpool then broke that record shortly after, with the signing of Collymore for 8.5M, which came in at 11% of the total.

 

In 1996, Newcastle bought Shearer for a British and world record fee of £16M. The league received around £100M in total, and this was a deal on the higher end, and worked at about 16% of the overall transfer income.

 

In 1997, Utd bought Henning Berg for 7.5M, which was nearly half the record price at the time, and it worked out at 5% of the total league income. Chelsea and Aston Villa had the highest individual transfers of the season, with Greame Le Saux going to Chelsea, and Stan Collymore going to Aston Villa, both worked out at 10% of the total league income.

 

In 1998 Utd signed Yorke for a fee of £18M, it was record money for the time, and again, it was around 9% compared to the total income.

 

In 2001 Utd got Veron for a record fee of £28M, it was a high price, and it was around 14% in comparison with the leagues income at the time. In todays market, we can work that out to be at about £120-£130M. They also signed Van Nistelrooy for £20M, working out at 11%, so in todays money around, £100-£110M.

 

In 2002, Utd broke the record fee again with Ferdinand for £30M from Leeds. The income was slightly lower this year, but this figure equated to 25% of the leagues total transfer income, which is the highest ever %. It shows you what a huge price it was. It was a ridiculous figure at the time for any player, especially a CB. To put it in perspective, today it would be around £215M. Ferdinand was a good player, but I don’t recall the media ridiculing Utd for over the top spending on this one. I checked out a few articles, and I was right, they didn’t, all they did was heap praise on him and analyse his potential. Which to be fair, is what they should do with every major signing for every club.

 

In 2003, they bought C.Ronaldo for £13M. We are told to marvel at the bargain price for the then 17 year old. But this was actually still 9% compared with the total that year. So it was still a high signing, today it would be around £75m-£80M for a relatively unknown teenager from Portugal. Worked out well, but only a big budget team would be able to do that, not exactly bargain shopping.

 

In 2004, they got Rooney for over double Ronaldo’s price at £30M, and that equated to double the %, coming in at 20%. Again, it’s at the very higher end of the scale, and suggest Utd could afford to pay double what they should to get him. In todays money, that would be £172M.

 

In 2006 they bought the most expensive player again, Michael Carrick came in at a figure of just below £20M which again, was 10% of the total for the year and today would cost between £100-£110M.

 

In 2007 they played the window slightly differently, they bought 3 players, Nani, Anderson and Hargreaves’s for a combined 20% total comparison. Instead of throwing it all into one big signing. Today that would be around £200M in signings.

 

In 2008 we had our takeover, so I stopped looking at them at this point and instead looked at some of our own highest transfers to see how we faired with comparison, this is what I saw:

 

Grealish - signed 2021 -14%
Dias - signed 2021 - 11%
Rodri - signed 2019 - 5%
Mahrez - signed 2018 - 11%.
KDB - signed 2015 - 10%
Sterling - signed 2015 - 9%
Aguero - signed 2011 - 9%
Dzeko - signed 2010 - 10%
Yaya - signed 2010 - 9%
David Silva - signed 2010 - 8%
Tevez - signed 2009 - 5%
Robinho - signed 2008 - 8%

 

Seems like we’re pretty good at getting players for fair market prices. I don’t see anything in this that suggests we’ve done anything too differently from any other team in the past, especially Utd. Fergusons strategy was often to sign individual players for the highest fees, and mainly from other English clubs even if it meant paying, way over the odds.

 

As you can see, the market value for players, correlates well with the income received. The income from transfers increases pretty much year on year. So based upon that, the income should be in the region of around £1.1 - 1.2B, next season. Meaning the top marquee signings, should probably go in the region of £110-£120M, for a fair value. This is how the inflation in football in England seems to go, and the next record transfer will be around this figure, unless a club pays over the odds

 

 

 

[LondonBlue 772]

Just now, Ayatollah Hermione said:

The CL is probably the thing that you’re remembered for as a club side and it’s probably what the players want to win these days but winning the Premier League these days is a ridiculous achievement. The quality is incredible these days and it’s relentless 

 

yep, it used to be that no one could compete with liverpool, then the same was said of man united.  cycles. Pep will be gone before you know it and a new cycle will start.

[PaddockLad 17252]

8 minutes ago, LondonBlue said:

 

yep, it used to be that no one could compete with liverpool, then the same was said of man united.  cycles. Pep will be gone before you know it and a new cycle will start.

I’ve been thinking about this today. Fergie wanted to “knock Liverpool off their fuckin perch” and as soon as we got promoted Keegan said the same about Fergie. So with all this in mind when do you envisage Pep leaving so Eddie Howe can romp us to our inevitable league title?