Jump to content

Sportswash! - Let’s oil stare at Manchester City!


Zatman

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Zatman said:

Not really true. 3 teams bought the title in Fergies reign yet he still beat them. 

I think Blackurn broke the transfer record for Shearer when they signed Cantona for a quarter of the price 

Now apply context to it... Utd bought Cantona from league champions Leeds, he was the only player to win the league consecutively with 2 different teams for 20 something years (pub quiz for you...) 

Might have been for relatively cheap but they still went out and bought the leagues best player because they could, something fergie did a lot 

Edit - and he did try to buy shearer! That would have made it 4 times out of 4 in the 90s that he bought the PLs best striker from another PL team 

Edited by villa4europe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, villa4europe said:

Yeah that's what I mean, fergie definitley had a large financial advantage of the years but he had the ability to adapt, he lost to rich Blackburn then came back, he lost to arsenal and then came back, he lost to Chelsea and then came back, he even lost to city and then came back, he saw off a good Newcastle team, rafas Liverpool and of course us

No one else has had that, mainly due to longevity, when Jose's done he's done, when Jose came along Wengers arsenal dropped off 

It would be interesting if klopp and pep spent 20 years in the PL but they won't, I don't think there will ever be another fergie 

Man United’s financial advantage was largely because of Ferguson’s success with the side.

Complain all you like but Manchester United earned their success, it wasn’t gifted to them like City or Chelsea. 

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

Man United’s financial advantage was largely because of Ferguson’s success with the side.

Complain all you like but Manchester United earned their success, it wasn’t gifted to them like City or Chelsea. 

Mix of both - they hit the Sky money at the absolute perfect time and smashed so many different transfer records during his reign.

Still a brilliant manager though. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bobzy said:

Mix of both - they hit the Sky money at the absolute perfect time and smashed so many different transfer records during his reign.

Still a brilliant manager though. 

They were only in a position to take the most Sky money because Ferguson had put them there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

They were only in a position to take the most Sky money because Ferguson had put them there. 

Did he though? 

I'll be honest and say I don't know the history of utd and their glory hunting and why OT is the biggest club stadium etc but I'd say utd were pretty big long before fergie got there, like i said before Cantona left league champions Leeds to join utd before they won a thing 

How that then transfered to fanbases in South East Asia and mental commercial deals again I'm not so sure but that you could say is fergie 

What was the value of the sharp deal in the 90s compared to our mitre copiers deal for example? 

I feel like utd off the pitch were lightyears ahead of everyone in the world - at the same time that Fergie was the best on it 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, villa4europe said:

Did he though? 

I'll be honest and say I don't know the history of utd and their glory hunting and why OT is the biggest club stadium etc but I'd say utd were pretty big long before fergie got there, like i said before Cantona left league champions Leeds to join utd before they won a thing 

How that then transfered to fanbases in South East Asia and mental commercial deals again I'm not so sure but that you could say is fergie 

What was the value of the sharp deal in the 90s compared to our mitre copiers deal for example? 

I feel like utd off the pitch were lightyears ahead of everyone in the world - at the same time that Fergie was the best on it 

Man Utd have always been a traditional big team but they weren't light years ahead of say, Arsenal or Liverpool in the early 90s in terms of commercial size. They just happened to have their dominance at the very start of the money/Sky Sports/Premier League era and it snowballed from there. 

The first sign of them becoming the behemoth they are now, for me at least, was the Andy Cole signing. That was a real shot across the bows. Taking the star striker from your closest rival. That was a big deal at time, much bigger than Cantona or Keane previously. 

It was a perfect storm of becoming the best team with the best manager at the best time to do it. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Plus for the fact for a number of years, Fergie was spot on with his transfers. 

Schmeichal, Cantona, Keane, etc, then jettisoning all the older players like Hughes, Ince and Kanchelskis, to make room for the class of '92. 

 

Edited by Xela
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ferguson>>>>Wenger>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Pep.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AJ said:

Ferguson>>>>Wenger>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Pep.

Jose is in between. Klopp at Liverpool arguably did more than Pep has and then Ranieri at Leicester. Conte at Chelsea was just as good

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Zatman said:

Jose is in between. Klopp at Liverpool arguably did more than Pep has and then Ranieri at Leicester. Conte at Chelsea was just as good

Jose I'd have ahead of him but only just because he too spent a ton of money 

But pep soon to be 4 titles, record points and record goals... He's comfortably 4th... And if he stayed he'd only eat away at the rest of it 

I think 5th is a pissing contest, no one stands out

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Zatman said:

Jose is in between. Klopp at Liverpool arguably did more than Pep has and then Ranieri at Leicester. Conte at Chelsea was just as good

I agree. I rate Ferguson and Wenger as 1 & 2. There are lots of managers I rate higher than Pep. I was just too lazy.

Edited by AJ
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

10 hours ago, LondonLax said:

Man United’s financial advantage was largely because of Ferguson’s success with the side.

Complain all you like but Manchester United earned their success, it wasn’t gifted to them like City or Chelsea. 

Absolute horse shit.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Zatman said:

Not really true. 3 teams bought the title in Fergies reign yet he still beat them. 

I think Blackurn broke the transfer record for Shearer when they signed Cantona for a quarter of the price 

The real story of Cantona is this. He was banging Chapman's wife. Howard Wilkinson had to decide who to get rid of - Lee or Eric. He chose Cantona.

At the time Cantona wasn't even a regular international (he was blamed for France not qualifying for a major comp after he gave the ball away fecking around in midfield.) 

But Cantona had an ego and wasn't going to go to just any old club, but, Fergie took a chance on bringing his mercurial talent a few short miles over the Pennines. And it worked. Fergie (and the folks behind the scenes at UTD who had handled George Best and others like him) knew how to get the best out of Cantona and he won them their 1st 2 PL titles. 

Fergie wasn't a genius - he took a gamble and it worked out for him. Then he got the "Class of '92." :puke:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, LondonLax said:

Man United’s financial advantage was largely because of Ferguson’s success with the side.

Complain all you like but Manchester United earned their success, it wasn’t gifted to them like City or Chelsea. 

 

25 minutes ago, TheAuthority said:

Absolute horse shit.

Add all the laughing emojis you like, your comments just demonstrate a complete ignorance of English football history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Xela said:

Man Utd have always been a traditional big team but they weren't light years ahead of say, Arsenal or Liverpool in the early 90s in terms of commercial size. They just happened to have their dominance at the very start of the money/Sky Sports/Premier League era and it snowballed from there. 

The first sign of them becoming the behemoth they are now, for me at least, was the Andy Cole signing. That was a real shot across the bows. Taking the star striker from your closest rival. That was a big deal at time, much bigger than Cantona or Keane previously. 

It was a perfect storm of becoming the best team with the best manager at the best time to do it. 

They got lucky with the timing of Sky but Fergie did help push them along into becoming what they are now. The one criticism I'd have of Fergie to say he's maybe not the best ever is the lack of dominance in Europe. They did well but I feel they should have won more frequently (as some continent

It's crass and unpleasant to say but Utd were also helped in becoming a global presence by the Munich disaster. That was global news at a time when football was starting to become more main stream and commercialised. It helped them to become known and sympathised with all around the world. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Phil Silvers said:

Fergie had the refs in his pocket, how many trophies did they win for him.

Sure so does Pep. Not just the unpunished tactical fouling but last season a ref actually changed the rules of the game to let them score vs us 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â