duke313

10 minutes ago, JPJCB said:

Yes I know. My question is how we would benefit from removal of that rule? Do we have affiliated companies that we would use to inflate sponsorship money? This seems like a rule whose removal uniquely benefits the likes of city and Newcastle which makes me confused as to why we would support getting rid of it 

We would need to inflate sponsorship if the rule was removed, our owners could just spend their own money, which the rule is currently preventing.

1 hour ago, Follyfoot said:

Man City owners are worth  23 billion I think, our three sets of owners are worth 17 / 18 billion. Surely that’s not too much of a gap to compete? Obviously, Newcastle is a different egg.

City's owners don't care how much they spend, i'd imagine ours do.

3 hours ago, viivvaa66 said:

If all financial rules are gone from PL, I would expect clubs will be divided into 3 tiers.

Tier 1: State sponsored clubs, that do not care about profitability, only about PR and sports washing.

Tier 2: Rich owners, that have money to spend, but in the end of the day will try to make a profit.

Tier 3: Poor owners, that will run the club with the revenue that the club is generating.

If this happened tier 1 clubs will run away with the league every season, making PL less interesting. This would negatively impact TV deals and sponsorship contracts, especially for non tier 1 clubs. In the end the PL will be as interesting as the French League.

They do anyway, one of them has won 6 of the last 7 league titles 

4 minutes ago, MotoMkali said:

That's 2 guys who are very strong defensively in coquelin and capoue. And parejo and lo celso are excellent going forward and no slouches defensively. Without Kamara we are lacking a true foundation for our midfield. 

I was more pointing out that those players are fairly average by comparison to most elite CL teams, and cost relatively nothing. Yet Unai got them to a CL semi.

Im sure that Kamara’s injury hasn’t been forgotten, and we’ll get cover in due course. The transfer window isn’t even open yet, and their is an international tournament starting next week.

6 minutes ago, rjenkins said:

The idea of Dougie being sold is hard to swallow for a number of a reasons.

There's a good core of this squad that have been with us for a number of years now, and it would be tough to let any of those players go.

Sacrifices have to be made to progress. Fans are emotionally attached to a lot of these players, but they’re all gonna leave at some point. Some sooner than others. 

Not that we’re linked with him, but if we need a Luiz replacement …

1 minute ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

Would we be willing to keep Zaniolo on loan again to save some money and give him a proper pre season and go?

Still has Aston Villa in his profile on IG as well lol.

Just a thought.

Wouldn’t we have to buy him? Unless Gala would agree to extend, but they could probably sell him.

10 minutes ago, RicRic said:

Imagine lining up next season against Man City 

      Barkley Gallagher Mcginn 

And feeling confident about getting a result, yeah let that sink in…love unai to bits but even then i would be in doubt of success, yes i get barkley isnt a starter probably but we could see that line up at certain points

Unai got to a CL semi final with this midfield

29 minutes ago, Hank Scorpio said:

We will possibly be doing the same selling players we don't want too as well

 

We won’t be selling anyone Emery hasn’t given the okay too. Unlike Chelsea who were not going to give Poch a say.

3 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

Good point. Let's hope so because od be delighted with gallagher.  I really feel under emerys coaching he can make him world class

Same, he'd be great under Emery.  I think he'll be forced out weather he wants to go or not, not necessarily to us but somewhere.

What a basket case of a club.  Both him and Mount, academy players being forced out  

18 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

I just have a feeling in my gut that i dont think this transfer will happen.

I think chelsea will end up selling one or two others and then they wont need to sell him and he will sign a new deal. 

Hope im wrong but thats my prediction 

Don't think Poch would have walked if their was any indication he might be kept, selling Gallagher was the reason he left.

Don't we already have several players who can play in Pereira's position?  Is he an upgrade on Buendia for example? 

4 minutes ago, CarryOnVilla said:

Decent player. Nice rotation option to Boubs 

He's an attacking midfielder.

7 minutes ago, legov said:

Win Champions League --> Sell more t-shirts --> Win more titles --> Suddenly everyone's wearing Man City shirts --> Casual sports fan associates Man City (and by extension whatever regime funds them) with prestige

I've never seen a single person in real life wear anything with a City logo on it.

8 minutes ago, MrBlack said:

I think they would, but that's down to the fact their owners aren't in it to make and money. They're in it to sports wash their reputation. 

And there in lies the real problem with the PL letting a state own a footbal club.

How does "Sports Washing" actually work?  Nobody is looking at City and Newcastle and thinking " wow, these countries are great now because a team I don't support won the Champions League".

2 minutes ago, HKP90 said:

 

I was going to preface that by saying 'if they keep their players'.

If they get Kamada, they could field Olise, Eze, Kamada, Wharton. That is some serious talent. 

They could be the new Brighton

4 minutes ago, BleedClaretAndBlue said:

Surely its Newcastle

Or Chelsea. Or Forest. Or Everton.

6 minutes ago, The_Steve said:

Soule is a baller. Would be a great wing option. 

He'd be phenomenal under Emery, he has a very high ceiling.

4 minutes ago, HalfTimePost said:

I'm not convinced Barkley + McKennie + Gallagher = Dougie.

I'm certain Barkley + McKennie don't = Dougie

Barkley + Gallagher = Dougie

So, in a nutshell; Chelsea need to sell him (ideally) before June? And we, (ideally) would be better buying him in July?

Soule is a big yes from me, if it means McKennie also then so be it. 

2 hours ago, lexicon said:

He needs game time and we can't afford to give him as much he needs to develop, I think. We're in a bit of a catch 22.

Selling him and bringing in an older striker who is happy to be rotated in and out would make a lot of sense for the position we find ourselves in. 

Sell Duran for profit, and bring in someone like Gerard Moreno or El-Nesyri.

20 minutes ago, Mic09 said:

£50m does not get you world class - world class in Mbappe, Haaland, ViniJR, Camavinga, Rodri, DeBruyne etc.

For comparison, Szoboshlai went for £70m to plop. 

£50m gets you a 'Diaby'. And I believe Gallagher would be a more effective addition is short and long term. 

If you believe City fans, Haaland only cost them £51m.

And, by all accounts Szoboslai has had as much impact at Liverpool as Diaby has with us, started off good then faded in the second half of the season.

37 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

About times pundits started doing their job regarding this. 

Stop making it sound like it's the greatest achievement in the world when they win a trophy. 

To many idoit pundits lauding them and Pep on how great they are.