Awesome Animals
Member
Man. If only Barry, Milner, and now Young had stayed...
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
FootballSoccerFútbolFussball Thread 2010/2011 |OT2|
- Thread starter Blablurn
- Start date
- Status
Vivalaraza
Member
If we assume the price is £17m as reported Villa only get about 4m of it. Watford had a sell on clause. Even less if it was closer to 15m.Shogun PaiN said:
You're right though a high-ish price considering the contract situation. Around 12m would have probably been fair but considering the interest of at least a couple other clubs £17m isn't too far over the top.
I'm assuming that United werent prepared to wait for the end of next season which would have left them disadvantaged when negotiating with Villa.They could ask for an inflated price becuse United were willing to pay.Also with the interest from Liverpool,United would need to pay that little bit extra.Shogun PaiN said:
farhatraza said:
I'm not saying the fee is over the top because Young himself is worth the money - It was pointing out that Villa did well to get that money considering his contract situation.
Clegg said:
17m is the inflated price. Villa done well to get what they did in the end.
anonnumber6
Banned
Inflated transfer market but I'm glad we have got him.
We were down to Nani, Park and Valencia on the wings.
We were down to Nani, Park and Valencia on the wings.
I'd be quite happy with Diarra,as long as he doesn't kick up a stink when rotated.He'd offer United something different.You can keep Gago though.MPW said:lol not happening
more like gago+lass
Also United wouldnt be able to afford Sneijder,he'd be looking for 200,000 a week.Nasri is a possibility.He only has a year left on his contract and so far hasn't signed an extension.If he does leave Arsenal he won't be going for mega money.
Vivalaraza
Member
£50m if we sign De Gea as expected.MPW said:
Difficult to say since we have no idea just how much money is available for transfers. I think we will recoup at least £15m just on the sale of squad players and (maybe close to the same if we sell Berbatov) so I reckon there might be enough for one top level CM. No chance of us buying two even if we had the money for it IMO.Shogun PaiN said:
Varane to sign for Real Madrid
"Even if we had stayed in Ligue 1, Raphael Varane would have left Lens as he is a phenomenon," Martel said at a meeting with the club's supporters. "He'll play for Real Madrid under Jose Mourinho's guidance. He has already met him, as well as meeting Zinedine Zidane.
hmm, i thought he would be loaned back for 1 season ... guess not.
man utd spending more than real madrid ... when was the last time this happened? :O
"Even if we had stayed in Ligue 1, Raphael Varane would have left Lens as he is a phenomenon," Martel said at a meeting with the club's supporters. "He'll play for Real Madrid under Jose Mourinho's guidance. He has already met him, as well as meeting Zinedine Zidane.
hmm, i thought he would be loaned back for 1 season ... guess not.
farhatraza said:
man utd spending more than real madrid ... when was the last time this happened? :O
farhatraza said:
Depending on where Sir Alex wants Jones to play, we have 5 first team CD now and Jones will not have much chance to play in CD (I would choose Smalling ahead of him if Rio is injured, again). If he plays in CM (mainly as DM), all we need will be another CM that can control tempo and play excellent long ball.
bonesmccoy
Banned
LabouredSubterfuge said:
Bad business! Meireles is guy who can play at a high level right now, Henderson is a player who has a lot of learning to do before he's even at that level.
I can't see Liverpool selling a player like that unless he's expressed a desire to leave.
Jeff Albertson
Member
Rumours on Rovers sites that we are in talks with Papiss Cisse, I doubt its true nor know how good he is
We are also said to be after Maurice Edu? Is he crap?
We are also said to be after Maurice Edu? Is he crap?
Clegg said:
Can't find any proper stats on the kid but like usual, the term "teenage sensation" is thrown at him: http://www.goal.com/en/news/1699/ch...let-angelo-henriquez-desperate-for-manchester
By the way, any Man Utd fans know what's happening with Macheda? I know he went off on loan somewhere but I take it he isn't going to really feature for Man Utd anymore?
Kermit The Dog
Banned
farhatraza said:
Wow you guys are buying your way to a trophy. 50 million? :lol
Yup.
Man City do get the hate for buying players. If it was City linked with / purchased Young, Jones, De Gea, Sanchez, Sneijder etc they'd be ruining football. But because it's United, it's ok. Maybe it's because they have always spent lots of money? Maybe it's because people are Jelly of City's billions? Who knows.
Anyway, City re-opened the City Store at the stadium today following another £1M renovation. It was last renovated following the take over. It opened today to coincide with the launch of the new away kit.
http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereve...ity-reopens-citystore-after-1m-revamp?rss=yes
That's insane haha! In the City Store in Manchester City Centre they have 27" iMacs for you to browse the online catalog. Well, did you expect anything less?
Man City do get the hate for buying players. If it was City linked with / purchased Young, Jones, De Gea, Sanchez, Sneijder etc they'd be ruining football. But because it's United, it's ok. Maybe it's because they have always spent lots of money? Maybe it's because people are Jelly of City's billions? Who knows.
Anyway, City re-opened the City Store at the stadium today following another £1M renovation. It was last renovated following the take over. It opened today to coincide with the launch of the new away kit.
http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereve...ity-reopens-citystore-after-1m-revamp?rss=yes
That's insane haha! In the City Store in Manchester City Centre they have 27" iMacs for you to browse the online catalog. Well, did you expect anything less?
Celtic have seemingly made an offer to Newcastle for Fraser Forster. I hope he stays at Newcastle and fights for the no. 1 jersey as I would really love to see him play for Newcastle (he's been on loan for god knows how many seasons now, so I haven't really seen him in action for us). I've heard some great things about him during his time with Celtic and I think he could be more beneficial to Newcastle than the inconsistent Krul and ageing Harper.
Vivalaraza
Member
Before you were interested in football, there was a time United were labelled as a team buying their way to success.dc89 said:
The main difference though, is United (and everyone else bar Chelsea really) spend money self generated. The money is "earnt" so to speak. City's obv is. As I've said before, I don't really resent it because City want to win things and have to spend to become successful. They lucked out on money so they're spending it.
However it is very different compared to, for example, United. People are jealous of City's money, of course they are...but at the same time City's spending "manner" is going to attract criticism no matter what.
Big problem is that they (City) raise the price and weekly pay of the players. Few years ago 20M was for a top class player, now the ask 20M for any average player, thanks to City and other oil-money-teams.
You know how much debt City has? They can't even pay all their players with the money they generate. The stadium, staff, transfers, etc is all with oil-money. 2013-14 UCL with Financial Fair Play should be fun.
farhatraza said:
Yep, this is the difference and why City are perceived to be buying their way to success. United have often spent heavily, but their success allows them to generate the vast majority of the money needed to fund that spending. They spend the revenues they generate from their success.
When City were taken over, they didn't have much in the way of success-generated revenue - the vast majority of the hundreds of millions they've spent so far has been funded by their owners. There's nothing particularly wrong with that, but it does give people the impression that City are looking for a quick route to success by using their huge wealth resources to buy practically a whole new team.
Kermit The Dog
Banned
farhatraza said:
I disregarded your post after you opened with that. Such arrogance is really off-putting.
People can hate/be jealous as much as you want, but if you think myself or anyone at City gives a fuck, you're wasting your time. If you want to talk about a club 'earning' its success, you must remember City was injected with billions of dollars for a reason: it was already built on solid foundations, with a fantastic culture, big fan support and huge potential for expansion.
City's success is no less legitimate than any other. It started from somewhere, and City were a quality club long before the Sheik got involved.
Kermit The Dog
Banned
elsk said:
You mean like paying Torres 50 millions and Liverpool paying 35 million for Carroll? And if I recall, the 80 million paid for Ronaldo went through before City got its spending power.
Neither can Liverpool or United, which is why both clubs are saddled with debt. What are you arguing here?
anonnumber6
Banned
No your gates aren't the biggest, you don't own your own stadium and there wasn't really much potential for expansion. Arsenal would have been a sensible takeover or Liverpool, sometimes I get the feeling Sheik Mansour only bought City because they came from Manchester.Kermit The Dog said:
Abramovich more or less paid for Carroll. And Liverpool have something like £30m debt "operating debt" or something. We aren't "saddled".Kermit The Dog said:
I think we all know that Man City will cheat the FFP system. I read somewhere they had two companies bidding for naming rights, £10m per year. Of course both were owned by Sheik Mansour.
United generate huge amounts of cash from winning trophies and rake money in from overseas.In terms of generating revenue from sales of merchandise City can't touch United.I think United are the highest earning club in world football.City spend massive amounts of money but don't have anywhwre near the potential revenue streams to even partly offset the cost.Kermit The Dog said:
farhatraza said:
If you're suggesting I've only been a City fan since 2008 you are sorely mistaken. I've been a fan all my life, I went to my first game when I was 5 and have watched them at all standards.
rvy said:
Haha. The kit is tribute to the late and great Neil Young.
@anonnumber6 And City was ready made for expansion. I've said this before that most people just do not know what they are talking about when it comes to the project undertook by Abu Dhabi. If you want I will list a number of things.
Kermit The Dog
Banned
rvy said:
Do your research. The kit is a homage to the 60's era.
You guys are swimming in bullshit. United and to a lesser extent Liverpool are mired in debt. They got in that situation by spending and investing beyond their means. You can criticise City for spending billions, but we are not in debt by any stretch and will fall within the Fair Play guidelines comfortably because the club is run well by people who know what they're doing.
Why is Chelsea allowed a free pass around here? Abramovich's tactics and moral compass have done much more damage to the culture of football than anything City has yet done. Not only did they start the trend of big-spending clubs, but they've left a trail of destruction, starting with the Mourinho fiasco, and if recent events such as the Ancelotti situation are anything to do by, he's nowhere close to finishing his destructive reign.
Kermit The Dog
Banned
anonnumber6 said:
You are astonishingly ignorant on this issue. The bolded bit is just something else. Wow.
LabouredSubterfuge
Member
Speaking of ignorance, IIRC United's debt comes not from poor financial management on the club's part but having a bunch of cunt American's buy out the club and then saddle the club with the debt of the buyout. Even while being hamstrung in tha wayt we are still better than you.
- Status