Football Season 2021-2022

[Fkiolaris]

Yep. Benitez is on the way out as a result. Everton's issues go beyond the manager, but they'll never realise that.

Title race is over anyway. It's a battle for the consolation spots now, from 2nd through to 20th.

The gap in quality between City and the rest is too much. The power of money wins everytime.

Not really. Man Utd have spent comparable amounts in transfer fees and probably more than City for agents and salaries and just look at the shambles. The difference in structure, organisation, football sense, planning and execution of their plans is night and day in comparison to the circus we (Man Utd) have. Let's put it this way, any of the managers we have had since Fergie would have done more at City than they did with us, while any of the City managers would have achieved less at the same time. With exactly the same budget.

[Jessicka]

Not really. Man Utd have spent comparable amounts in transfer fees and probably more than City for agents and salaries and just look at the shambles. The difference in structure, organisation, football sense, planning and execution of their plans is night and day in comparison to the circus we (Man Utd) have. Let's put it this way, any of the managers we have had since Fergie would have done more at City than they did with us, while any of the City managers would have achieved less at the same time. With exactly the same budget.

Not like Everton haven't spent either, again, they spent horrendously and painted themselves into a corner because it wasn't sustainable.

[DingDongKing]

Alright, let’s rephrase it for the Man United and Everton fans in the house. The power of money has the higher probability of winning on a regularly basis as long as the club involved also uses said finances to hire really competent management up and down the club. This management is key, and would normally wouldn’t be available to said club unless said immense financial power was present. Okay?

[Marleycat]

Alright, let’s rephrase it for the Man United and Everton fans in the house. The power of money has the higher probability of winning on a regularly basis as long as the club involved also uses said finances to hire really competent management up and down the club. This management is key, and would normally wouldn’t be available to said club unless said immense financial power was present. Okay?

And Arsenal Chelsea West Ham Aston Villa Newcastle of course

Oddly though Man Utd Chelsea and Arsenal who have spent a bunch are still well in the green when it comes to FFP (Actually spurs are top of that list, we could spend a cool 400 million and still be ok, Shame Daniel Levy will spend about 1/10th of that a year). Everton are in huge trouble though.

oh and fun fact:- Chris Wood highest ever transfer fee for a 30 year old player in PL history!

[DingDongKing]

And Arsenal Chelsea West Ham Aston Villa Newcastle of course

Oddly though Man Utd Chelsea and Arsenal who have spent a bunch are still well in the green when it comes to FFP (Actually spurs are top of that list, we could spend a cool 400 million and still be ok, Shame Daniel Levy will spend about 1/10th of that a year). Everton are in huge trouble though.

oh and fun fact:- Chris Wood highest ever transfer fee for a 30 year old player in PL history!

I think Chelsea on the whole have done pretty well. Have Arsenal, West Ham, Aston Villa got the same financial power as City/Chelsea though?

But yeah, it's obviously contingent on hiring the right people. But you can only do that where money becomes next to know impediment.

Daniel Levy is a weird one, man. It almost feels like his hubris is what holds Spurs back. Just too much arrogance behind a lot of decision making.

[Jessicka]

Money without structure can easily become a disaster, but structure without money can actually get a team a pretty long way. It's just sustaining it becomes an issue, when those with bigger wallets buy up all the successful parts. It needs both, City and Chelsea have that.

As for Levy, I think he got frightened off big spending when he pissed away all that Bale money on nothing, that's understandable.

[Marleycat]

Unfortunately I agree Chelsea have done well, I think they could put out a team of "Chelsea Products" that could be a top 6 team right now, thinking James, Lukaku, Mount, Gallagher, Gilmour, Hudson-odio, etc. Playing them 3 times in 2 week really shows the current poor level of Spurs. Having said that they always feel a bit more beatable than City and Liverpool.

Teams like Arsenal Liverpool West Ham Villa even Palace have wage bills that are creeping towards the money clubs and another reason Spurs miss out on big signings.

Levey did one great thing a deadline day signing of Rapha VDV, he has lived on that for ever, in fact the British press has almost created this "deadline day fever" that is constantly a let down on that incident.

The disaster of the Bale money should never be forgotten, I guess we got Eriksen for a bargain and actually recouped all but about 10 million selling them on but who really thinks you can replace what was maybe one of the top 3 players in the world with 7 average joes?

Right now we are playing with Docherty the worst right back Ive seen pull on the shirt at left back, where remarkably hes even worse! and no whisper of a signing. Youve got to have a plan, signing players on the last day of January rather than the first smacks of desperation and only about 10 games for them to have an effect. But I see that smiling ratty Levey face as the clock ticks down every damn window, and the next day talk about how we have the best ground in the world and the best facilities in Europe; which just feels great when you're scrapping it out for a Europa Conference spot with Wolves West Ham and Brighton.


Hes been lucky Poch had us overachieving for years, I mean 18 months without a signing in these times seems insane!

You may have hit the nail with Levy mentioning pride and arrogance.

[Fkiolaris]

Money without structure can easily become a disaster, but structure without money can actually get a team a pretty long way. It's just sustaining it becomes an issue, when those with bigger wallets buy up all the successful parts. It needs both, City and Chelsea have that.

As for Levy, I think he got frightened off big spending when he pissed away all that Bale money on nothing, that's understandable.

Yeah, the first part is 100% correct. Prime (football) example is Ajax, but there have been many other stories all over Europe and the globe (Atletico Madrid, Leicester etc). You also have even more stories of clubs throwing money left, right and centre and achieving absolutely nothing.

As for Levy, my explanation is pretty simple: he is an imbecile who likes to play "hard man".

[Marleycat]

And Spurs are the first team in history to retain the Puskas award, (with Lamelas second best Rabona) another reason for Levy to say we don't need to spend!

https://twitter.com/i/status/1483149635501928454

[DingDongKing]

Yeah, the first part is 100% correct. Prime (football) example is Ajax, but there have been many other stories all over Europe and the globe (Atletico Madrid, Leicester etc). You also have even more stories of clubs throwing money left, right and centre and achieving absolutely nothing.

As for Levy, my explanation is pretty simple: he is an imbecile who likes to play "hard man".

Leicester are owned by a billionaire. Atletico have been massively in debt because of their historic expenditure.

Ajax are doing well continentally now, and even that is semi-final stage so far. Not proper European trophies just yet. So the point still stands. If you higher good management from top-down and they use the immense wealth of the big clubs wisely, it's hard to compete.

Even clubs like Chelsea, Liverpool, United will not be able to keep up with City, because they'll just keep hoovering up all the talent required.

[jonnysensible]

Leicester are owned by a billionaire. Atletico have been massively in debt because of their historic expenditure.

Ajax are doing well continentally now, and even that is semi-final stage so far. Not proper European trophies just yet. So the point still stands. If you higher good management from top-down and they use the immense wealth of the big clubs wisely, it's hard to compete.

Even clubs like Chelsea, Liverpool, United will not be able to keep up with City, because they'll just keep hoovering up all the talent required.

City are a state project with unlimted funds. The club has the top people in every department. The did alot of this before financial fair play came in (which is why newcastle will struggle to repeat it). Guardiola has 2 top starting 11's with most of the players being worth over 40million, with all the players being pretty interchangable meaning you can maintain a standard no matter who is out and who is in. This also means they can rest anyone they want.

They like taking players off the market as well. When they realised nobody else wanted harry kane they didnt bother going in for him.

Now they are in a position that success is inevitable because of the money as well.

The only problem for City is that they are a team that inspires no emotion. I couldn't care less if City win the title or lose the title, there is no story to them.

[Xanjori]

Glad I didnt turn off the Spurs game in the 90th minute.

[DingDongKing]

City are a state project with unlimted funds. The club has the top people in every department. The did alot of this before financial fair play came in (which is why newcastle will struggle to repeat it). Guardiola has 2 top starting 11's with most of the players being worth over 40million, with all the players being pretty interchangable meaning you can maintain a standard no matter who is out and who is in. This also means they can rest anyone they want.

They like taking players off the market as well. When they realised nobody else wanted harry kane they didnt bother going in for him.

Now they are in a position that success is inevitable because of the money as well.

The only problem for City is that they are a team that inspires no emotion. I couldn't care less if City win the title or lose the title, there is no story to them.

That's literally my point. They're pretty much a shoe in for the League every year until their owners decide to sell up.

[Marleycat]

Glad I didnt turn off the Spurs game in the 90th minute.

Unbelievable to get the win, never before in the Premier League has a team been losing in the 95th and won the game. Man City 91.48mins v QPR next closest and will probably be more remembered, but I cant imagine Ill ever be screaming about beating Leicester again the way I was this afternoon.

Maybe they'll even start calling it "Leicestery"

[Fkiolaris]

Leicester are owned by a billionaire. Atletico have been massively in debt because of their historic expenditure.

Ajax are doing well continentally now, and even that is semi-final stage so far. Not proper European trophies just yet. So the point still stands. If you higher good management from top-down and they use the immense wealth of the big clubs wisely, it's hard to compete.

Even clubs like Chelsea, Liverpool, United will not be able to keep up with City, because they'll just keep hoovering up all the talent required.

Your points are irrelevant though. Leicester are owned by a billionaire but only spend what they make more or less- which is peanuts in comparison to City and United. Atletico is in debt, but that does not compare to what Real Madrid and Barcelona have been spending. I mean, just because I am in debt for buying a house it does not mean that my expenditure matches what Bezos is throwing around when trying to get his rockets into space (hyperbole, but you get the point). As for Ajax, since City got bought you are comparing a CL final (City) vs a CL semi and a Europa final (Ajax)- I am not sure I would call City's record better. Plus, Ajax has the European titles of the past and the general European pedigree.

So yeah, the examples I mentioned clearly show that you can beat big spenders with proper planning, hard work, talent and yes, some luck. Not very frequently, but you definitely can.

[DingDongKing]

Your points are irrelevant though. Leicester are owned by a billionaire but only spend what they make more or less- which is peanuts in comparison to City and United. Atletico is in debt, but that does not compare to what Real Madrid and Barcelona have been spending. I mean, just because I am in debt for buying a house it does not mean that my expenditure matches what Bezos is throwing around when trying to get his rockets into space (hyperbole, but you get the point). As for Ajax, since City got bought you are comparing a CL final (City) vs a CL semi and a Europa final (Ajax)- I am not sure I would call City's record better. Plus, Ajax has the European titles of the past and the general European pedigree.

So yeah, the examples I mentioned clearly show that you can beat big spenders with proper planning, hard work, talent and yes, some luck. Not very frequently, but you definitely can.

Transfer expenditure isn't the only element of financial muscle as far as a club is concerned, don't be so naive. They manage to cover wages, which is key to player retention. Their infrastructure is excellent, and they manage to attract a higher class of manager than other clubs. All of that is possible due to financial muscle. Ajax's European history means jack squat today. City might have faltered in Europe, but they're dominating a domestic league that is far superior to the Dutch one. Pound for pound, City will always be ahead of these clubs barring a catastrophic collapse.

[Jessicka]

Transfer expenditure isn't the only element of financial muscle as far as a club is concerned, don't be so naive. They manage to cover wages, which is key to player retention. Their infrastructure is excellent, and they manage to attract a higher class of manager than other clubs. All of that is possible due to financial muscle. Ajax's European history means jack squat today. City might have faltered in Europe, but they're dominating a domestic league that is far superior to the Dutch one. Pound for pound, City will always be ahead of these clubs barring a catastrophic collapse.

I don't think anyone is disputing that City have both money, and internal structures to sustain long term success. The point was rather than internal structure can do a lot besides just having money, and that money without structure gives you shitshows like United, Everton, and a litany of other clubs who chased short term success by overspending on players.

Ideally you have both, but if you can only have one, it's better to get the structures right first. And that is what City did.

[DingDongKing]

I don't think anyone is disputing that City have both money, and internal structures to sustain long term success. The point was rather than internal structure can do a lot besides just having money, and that money without structure gives you shitshows like United, Everton, and a litany of other clubs who chased short term success by overspending on players.

That part is without question. My point is clubs like Ajax, Atletico and Leicester City aren't really examples of 'plucky underdog'.

They're still extremely well resourced clubs financially relative to everyone around them. Ajax less so than other big European teams, but at a domestic level, they're still way better setup and financially structured compared to the other Dutch teams.

[Jessicka]

That part is without question. My point is clubs like Ajax, Atletico and Leicester City aren't really examples of 'plucky underdog'.

They're still extremely well resourced clubs financially relative to everyone around them. Ajax less so than other big European teams, but at a domestic level, they're still way better setup and financially structured compared to the other Dutch teams.

They are teams that use those resources on structure rather than pissing it on overpriced players though, and the money invested is still, compared to top 6 PL clubs relatively modest.

[DingDongKing]

They are teams that use those resources on structure rather than pissing it on overpriced players though, and the money invested is still, compared to top 6 PL clubs relatively modest.

Leicester’s net spend over the last 5 years is in line with Chelsea and Liverpool. It’s £112m for Leicester, £133m for Chelsea and £92m for Liverpool. It’s not dramatically far off.