VillaChris Posted November 20, 2017 Share Posted November 20, 2017 I get where you're coming from OFTR but it's just the way football is I'm afraid these days. Let's get out act together and win something significant in next ten years so we can stop having envious glances to other clubs achieving the success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted November 20, 2017 Author Share Posted November 20, 2017 think City have done it worse than Chelsea and nowhere near as successful. 2 league titles and 1 Fa Cup in nearly 10 years of oil money is pretty awful 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvfcRigo82 Posted November 20, 2017 Share Posted November 20, 2017 They are a joy to watch and a force at the moment though you have to admit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted November 20, 2017 Share Posted November 20, 2017 1 hour ago, Zatman said: think City have done it worse than Chelsea and nowhere near as successful. 2 league titles and 1 Fa Cup in nearly 10 years of oil money is pretty awful How so? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted November 20, 2017 Author Share Posted November 20, 2017 They inflated the market a lot more than Chelsea did, overpaid for shitter players. Plus have raided lesser clubs for star players or potential stars and used them sparingly like Santa Cruz, Bony, Rodwell even Delph. Also have paid ridiculous contracts that they dont care anymore hence dickheads like Ireland, Richards and Lescott 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted November 20, 2017 Share Posted November 20, 2017 Is there any of that that Chelsea didn't do, but at a lower price due to inflation? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted November 20, 2017 Author Share Posted November 20, 2017 1 minute ago, HanoiVillan said: Is there any of that that Chelsea didn't do, but at a lower price due to inflation? Not really Chelsea never went as crazy as City, until Torres im sure they never broke the transfer record. They never had to go and spend the equivalent of 160 million on 3 full backs and a goalkeeper in a summer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa89 Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 11 hours ago, HanoiVillan said: Is there any of that that Chelsea didn't do, but at a lower price due to inflation? No. Chelsea did the same, things were just cheaper back then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 11 hours ago, Zatman said: Not really Chelsea never went as crazy as City, until Torres im sure they never broke the transfer record. They never had to go and spend the equivalent of 160 million on 3 full backs and a goalkeeper in a summer Average players cost 40 mil now . City have not spent massively on one single player like man U. Pogba and Lukaku Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaChris Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 Chelsea signing SWP in 2005 for 20 odd million and then barely playing him (mainly because he wasn't good enough for that level) was an example of all those things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 19 hours ago, One For The Road said: Haven't seen a PL game since walking out of VP under Lerner so no idea about Man City, Man United or any other glory hunter club but I will say this: If Man City win the Champions League I'll be absolutely devastated. i had the pleasure of the company of a man utd fan on sunday....he actually uttered the words "id rather man city won the champions league than PSG" maybe one for the games gone thread 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 (edited) 12 hours ago, Zatman said: They inflated the market a lot more than Chelsea did, overpaid for shitter players. Plus have raided lesser clubs for star players or potential stars and used them sparingly like Santa Cruz, Bony, Rodwell even Delph. Also have paid ridiculous contracts that they dont care anymore hence dickheads like Ireland, Richards and Lescott disagree but i would say that city almost purposefully weakened those around them whilst strengthening their own team, barry from us, lescott from everton, cherry picking arsenal, unsettling a lot of others (although agents need to take some blame for that too) city used money to buy players dropping down to them or moving sideways, i dont think chelsea did, they just bought the best players from teams below them or from abroad, the only one really was makelele from madrid but he was unhappy and had put in a transfer request iirc agree about your trophy record comment though, i dont think people realise how little city have actually won with the money Edited November 21, 2017 by villa4europe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 42 minutes ago, VillaChris said: Chelsea signing SWP in 2005 for 20 odd million and then barely playing him (mainly because he wasn't good enough for that level) was an example of all those things. Man City did similar with Roque Santa Cruz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 12 hours ago, Zatman said: Not really Chelsea never went as crazy as City, until Torres im sure they never broke the transfer record. They never had to go and spend the equivalent of 160 million on 3 full backs and a goalkeeper in a summer You’re just forgetting history. As soon as Abramovich came in, they spent over £100m (14 years ago btw) on basically an entire new team including: Damian Duff for £17m, Adrian Mutu for £16m, Scott Parker for £10m, and Wayne Bridge and Glen Johnson for £15m combined. £100m back then is probably £600m in today’s market. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted November 26, 2017 Share Posted November 26, 2017 Pep has made Sterling into a top class player. You wouldn't swap Sanchez for him now! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted November 26, 2017 Author Share Posted November 26, 2017 you really would, if he had the choice Pep would too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted November 26, 2017 Share Posted November 26, 2017 I wouldn't Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaChris Posted November 26, 2017 Share Posted November 26, 2017 Could they get 100 points this season I wonder? Might look up the odds for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvfcRigo82 Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 5 hours ago, VillaChris said: Could they get 100 points this season I wonder? Might look up the odds for that. 2/1 if you're lucky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 13 hours ago, Zatman said: you really would, if he had the choice Pep would too I don't think he would - Sanchez wouldn't work as well in this system, which is absolutely nailed down now btw. It may have been work-in-progress last season, but Sané and Sterling have become pivotal in those wide-forward positions. Just can't see them getting beaten in the league at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts