Doing a Man City

[Guus]

Read this thread regularly, thought about commenting, and am glad I hadn't really put my 2p in.

I turned up on Saturday and saw our previously second choice keeper pull of a few blinding saves and cause the whole Holte End to chant his name even when he just caught a cross, , a previously "league one quality" right back chest the ball down for a phenomenal volley into the back of the net, a raw 21-year old Belgian get heavily involved up front and chase down an errant back pass for a goal (who last did that kinda thing for Villa?), a little-known Australian who's plied his trade in the Dutch league run himself into oblivion for 70-odd minutes chasing down every loose ball and pushing us forward into attacking positions, a £3m central defender get promoted to team captain in his 4th Premiership match and show everyone how much it meant to both him and the team by leading by example, and more than anything else I watched a Villa team being praised, guided, supported, comforted, and challenged by a manager who has put faith in players that other clubs might have shied away from and watch it bring an enthusiasm back to Villa Park's crowd that's been sorely missing for a good while.

Man City's unlimited millions and signing players on £200,000 a week? **** 'em. Nice if they can do it - but what I got from watching my team at the weekend was a massive smile, a spring in my step, and a realisation that Paul Lambert's vision is probably going to make watching Villa an exciting roller-coaster of a ride that could take us absolutely anywhere.

Not blind love, maybe blinkered at worst.

^This is where I'm at.^

[Richard]

Ah yes the clairvoyants are out again, predicting the ill-fated demise of Manchester City and their evil brand of mercenary football!

I wonder if the same people(if alive) will be saying the same in 30 years time when City have forged a history greater than any other and are still challenging for silverware. Equipped with flat cap & thermos (or futuristic equivalents) firing off anecdotes of where it all went wrong.

It wasn't so long ago that people on here were claiming City would never win the title before their rich owners 'got bored'. Waxing lyrical how Man Utd did it the 'correct' way that we should follow, by 'blooding their youth' which in reality is defined as Beckham, Scholes & Giggs, the rest they bought. In fact their team now is still more expensive than City's and some were bought a while back, without inflation.

This didn't start with Man City, in fact they are rather a comfort (to me at least) that the mould can actually be broken, although that is looking less likely to ever happen again with the Financial 'Fair' Player rules which people, again, think will be the bane of City(noticing a trend here?) when in fact all that will be accomplished in essence, is solidifying the assets already in place i.e.. the top 4/5. It's little wonder the top clubs have been so agreeable about it and somehow the smaller clubs (and the average ignoramus) have been fooled into thinking it's somehow a good thing for football? I despair.

Then there are the people, who quite remarkably, would be FOR a 'Super League' to get rid of those pagan assholes so we can go back to 1960! (where curiously, players still left for bigger clubs with more money). There's just one minor drawback, money would dry up and nobody would watch it anymore. Moreover any, however fanciful and unlikely, aspirations and dreams that still remain for smaller clubs breaking into the top flight would be masticated, since they will never achieve 'top flight' in effect and neither would we. Probably THE worst thing that could happen and it's unfathomable that some claim this wouldn't be catastrophic, much less want it to happen.

The opinion that really riles me above all others though, is this notion of 'the right way' to do things. The CORRECT way as if this is kind of medical procedure with one definitive approach. It's ok for us to take some players off teams less fortunate than our own, but when city takes a player off us it's outrageous, money has ruined everything! Get a hold of yourselves. Should we just block transfers altogether? Be able to field just those from Birmingham and play County football instead and pull in some astronomical cricket crowds perhaps. This has been going on for half a century, and it's all too easy to blame 'Sky's Football'. It's a popular sport yet some want to make it less popular to satisfy their demands.

Yes it's about money, yes i'd take any properly reviewed bid by a multi-billionaire in a heartbeat. Any who wouldn't take an opportunity like that with open arms because of their skewed sense of morality (in the entertainment industry) should stop following Villa and football as a whole rather than just threaten to do so. The bubble isn't bursting in our lifetimes so go and watch Tom Daley jump off a board instead or something.

I'd much rather our league stayed how it is to be honest, it's a good thing and we should all learn to appreciate it before people with money start looking elsewhere (which has begun already) because of our nonsensical stipulations and high taxes. I would rather the Russian League wasn't the 'one to watch' thank you very much. We compete in the best league in the world however cliche it is to say, it's the truth. I still enjoy watching the villa compete in it no matter how futile some would consider it to be.

one of the best posts I have read on this site in the last three years

[joepane]

I agree with the post. Saturday was a great game because it was that feel good factor back at Villa Park, a sense we'd bought unknown talents and they'd done well.

The only time I'd allow a rich owner in is if they provided this 'legacy' that we want from the Olympics. A chance for the youth of the area (particularly of B6) to get involved with the club a little more. New youth facilities actually in the area rather than rural Staffordshire that means we can provide the opportunity disadvantaged kids that want to play football. This is surely better for the future than buying expensive 'I'm getting paid so I don't care' players.

[Straggler]

Ah yes the clairvoyants are out again, predicting the ill-fated demise of Manchester City and their evil brand of mercenary football!

I wonder if the same people(if alive) will be saying the same in 30 years time when City have forged a history greater than any other and are still challenging for silverware. Equipped with flat cap & thermos (or futuristic equivalents) firing off anecdotes of where it all went wrong.

It wasn't so long ago that people on here were claiming City would never win the title before their rich owners 'got bored'. Waxing lyrical how Man Utd did it the 'correct' way that we should follow, by 'blooding their youth' which in reality is defined as Beckham, Scholes & Giggs, the rest they bought. In fact their team now is still more expensive than City's and some were bought a while back, without inflation.

This didn't start with Man City, in fact they are rather a comfort (to me at least) that the mould can actually be broken, although that is looking less likely to ever happen again with the Financial 'Fair' Player rules which people, again, think will be the bane of City(noticing a trend here?) when in fact all that will be accomplished in essence, is solidifying the assets already in place i.e.. the top 4/5. It's little wonder the top clubs have been so agreeable about it and somehow the smaller clubs (and the average ignoramus) have been fooled into thinking it's somehow a good thing for football? I despair.

Then there are the people, who quite remarkably, would be FOR a 'Super League' to get rid of those pagan assholes so we can go back to 1960! (where curiously, players still left for bigger clubs with more money). There's just one minor drawback, money would dry up and nobody would watch it anymore. Moreover any, however fanciful and unlikely, aspirations and dreams that still remain for smaller clubs breaking into the top flight would be masticated, since they will never achieve 'top flight' in effect and neither would we. Probably THE worst thing that could happen and it's unfathomable that some claim this wouldn't be catastrophic, much less want it to happen.

The opinion that really riles me above all others though, is this notion of 'the right way' to do things. The CORRECT way as if this is kind of medical procedure with one definitive approach. It's ok for us to take some players off teams less fortunate than our own, but when city takes a player off us it's outrageous, money has ruined everything! Get a hold of yourselves. Should we just block transfers altogether? Be able to field just those from Birmingham and play County football instead and pull in some astronomical cricket crowds perhaps. This has been going on for half a century, and it's all too easy to blame 'Sky's Football'. It's a popular sport yet some want to make it less popular to satisfy their demands.

Yes it's about money, yes i'd take any properly reviewed bid by a multi-billionaire in a heartbeat. Any who wouldn't take an opportunity like that with open arms because of their skewed sense of morality (in the entertainment industry) should stop following Villa and football as a whole rather than just threaten to do so. The bubble isn't bursting in our lifetimes so go and watch Tom Daley jump off a board instead or something.

I'd much rather our league stayed how it is to be honest, it's a good thing and we should all learn to appreciate it before people with money start looking elsewhere (which has begun already) because of our nonsensical stipulations and high taxes. I would rather the Russian League wasn't the 'one to watch' thank you very much. We compete in the best league in the world however cliche it is to say, it's the truth. I still enjoy watching the villa compete in it no matter how futile some would consider it to be.

Interesting that you start with a critisism of the "clairvoyants" for thier predictions and then go on to make some pretty bold predictions of your own. One in particular claiming that the bubble won't burst in our lifetimes covers a period that could comfortably be 80+ years given the age of some on here.

I imagine in 1932 there were some pretty wild ideas about where the sport of football might be in 2012, but I do wonder if they were deliverd with the same certainty that you have covered the next 80+ years.

Am I assume that your brand of future telling is superior and therefore your argument should carry more weight?

You also mention other people claiming that their view is the correct way of doing things particularly riles you. You then tell anyone who does not follow your view that "any properly reviewed bid by a multi-billionaire" is the way forward, to stop following the Villa. That strikes me as pretty hypocritical.

By the way, I do like the idea of fielding teams exclusively from the local community. It appeals to me to have that closeness with the people that support the team. I am equally able to understand this is not likely and am happy enough to toddle around after the Villa in whatever format that they exist wishing them the best.

[Richard]

Well we did man citeh last night thats for sure

[Raver50032]

Yes we did - I did not expect anything from the game I'm afraid, even against the considerable riches of their 'B-team' (ish). I see that their fans are saying how 'times have changed now that Villa fans seemingly treated the game as a cup semi-final.'

The fact remains - it would be great to be in a position where the League Cup (Capital One can fook right off) is the bottom priority and we can 'not care too much' if we get knocked out.

We have some catching up to do to get back to a postion where we have won the LC more than anyone else. Liverpool have now raced ahead to 8 wins, against our 5. Scumbag Chelsea hot on our heals with 4 wins. So they can bugger right off. Shitbags.

[AVFCforever1991]

No thanks, Don't want to be a plastic club.

[PandaMac]

It only took me until last night to realise this but I'd hate it if we did a man city. The fact they think they're too big to be bothered about the league cup says it all.

Players, staff and most importantly fans who put their heart and soul into every game win, lose or draw.

[stanthemanisgod]

Dont get me wrong I'd love the ability to put out a 'B' team that included some of the names on display for City last night. I'd love Villa's fixture calendar to be so full of CL fixtures we have to allocate the league cup as a lower priority. Just not sure I'd feel comfortable knowing that it all came from paying player 2 or 3 times as much as they'd get elsewhere.

Also it's a bit harsh to say they thought they were too big to be bothered, that team would be in the runnning for a top 6-8 finish in the league it still had some real quality, it wasn't as if they threw out the under 21 side.

[Folski]

We rested Bent, Guzan & Bannan. Along with missing Ireland, all of whom have been consistent first team players so far this year.

[Jon]

Ah yes the clairvoyants are out again, predicting the ill-fated demise of Manchester City and their evil brand of mercenary football!

I wonder if the same people(if alive) will be saying the same in 30 years time when City have forged a history greater than any other and are still challenging for silverware. Equipped with flat cap & thermos (or futuristic equivalents) firing off anecdotes of where it all went wrong.

It wasn't so long ago that people on here were claiming City would never win the title before their rich owners 'got bored'. Waxing lyrical how Man Utd did it the 'correct' way that we should follow, by 'blooding their youth' which in reality is defined as Beckham, Scholes & Giggs, the rest they bought. In fact their team now is still more expensive than City's and some were bought a while back, without inflation.

This didn't start with Man City, in fact they are rather a comfort (to me at least) that the mould can actually be broken, although that is looking less likely to ever happen again with the Financial 'Fair' Player rules which people, again, think will be the bane of City(noticing a trend here?) when in fact all that will be accomplished in essence, is solidifying the assets already in place i.e.. the top 4/5. It's little wonder the top clubs have been so agreeable about it and somehow the smaller clubs (and the average ignoramus) have been fooled into thinking it's somehow a good thing for football? I despair.

Then there are the people, who quite remarkably, would be FOR a 'Super League' to get rid of those pagan assholes so we can go back to 1960! (where curiously, players still left for bigger clubs with more money). There's just one minor drawback, money would dry up and nobody would watch it anymore. Moreover any, however fanciful and unlikely, aspirations and dreams that still remain for smaller clubs breaking into the top flight would be masticated, since they will never achieve 'top flight' in effect and neither would we. Probably THE worst thing that could happen and it's unfathomable that some claim this wouldn't be catastrophic, much less want it to happen.

The opinion that really riles me above all others though, is this notion of 'the right way' to do things. The CORRECT way as if this is kind of medical procedure with one definitive approach. It's ok for us to take some players off teams less fortunate than our own, but when city takes a player off us it's outrageous, money has ruined everything! Get a hold of yourselves. Should we just block transfers altogether? Be able to field just those from Birmingham and play County football instead and pull in some astronomical cricket crowds perhaps. This has been going on for half a century, and it's all too easy to blame 'Sky's Football'. It's a popular sport yet some want to make it less popular to satisfy their demands.

Yes it's about money, yes i'd take any properly reviewed bid by a multi-billionaire in a heartbeat. Any who wouldn't take an opportunity like that with open arms because of their skewed sense of morality (in the entertainment industry) should stop following Villa and football as a whole rather than just threaten to do so. The bubble isn't bursting in our lifetimes so go and watch Tom Daley jump off a board instead or something.

I'd much rather our league stayed how it is to be honest, it's a good thing and we should all learn to appreciate it before people with money start looking elsewhere (which has begun already) because of our nonsensical stipulations and high taxes. I would rather the Russian League wasn't the 'one to watch' thank you very much. We compete in the best league in the world however cliche it is to say, it's the truth. I still enjoy watching the villa compete in it no matter how futile some would consider it to be.

one of the best posts I have read on this site in the last three years

Yet strangely, full of inaccuracies.

[Wainy316]

Ah yes the clairvoyants are out again, predicting the ill-fated demise of Manchester City and their evil brand of mercenary football!

I wonder if the same people(if alive) will be saying the same in 30 years time when City have forged a history greater than any other and are still challenging for silverware. Equipped with flat cap & thermos (or futuristic equivalents) firing off anecdotes of where it all went wrong.

It wasn't so long ago that people on here were claiming City would never win the title before their rich owners 'got bored'. Waxing lyrical how Man Utd did it the 'correct' way that we should follow, by 'blooding their youth' which in reality is defined as Beckham, Scholes & Giggs, the rest they bought. In fact their team now is still more expensive than City's and some were bought a while back, without inflation.

This didn't start with Man City, in fact they are rather a comfort (to me at least) that the mould can actually be broken, although that is looking less likely to ever happen again with the Financial 'Fair' Player rules which people, again, think will be the bane of City(noticing a trend here?) when in fact all that will be accomplished in essence, is solidifying the assets already in place i.e.. the top 4/5. It's little wonder the top clubs have been so agreeable about it and somehow the smaller clubs (and the average ignoramus) have been fooled into thinking it's somehow a good thing for football? I despair.

Then there are the people, who quite remarkably, would be FOR a 'Super League' to get rid of those pagan assholes so we can go back to 1960! (where curiously, players still left for bigger clubs with more money). There's just one minor drawback, money would dry up and nobody would watch it anymore. Moreover any, however fanciful and unlikely, aspirations and dreams that still remain for smaller clubs breaking into the top flight would be masticated, since they will never achieve 'top flight' in effect and neither would we. Probably THE worst thing that could happen and it's unfathomable that some claim this wouldn't be catastrophic, much less want it to happen.

The opinion that really riles me above all others though, is this notion of 'the right way' to do things. The CORRECT way as if this is kind of medical procedure with one definitive approach. It's ok for us to take some players off teams less fortunate than our own, but when city takes a player off us it's outrageous, money has ruined everything! Get a hold of yourselves. Should we just block transfers altogether? Be able to field just those from Birmingham and play County football instead and pull in some astronomical cricket crowds perhaps. This has been going on for half a century, and it's all too easy to blame 'Sky's Football'. It's a popular sport yet some want to make it less popular to satisfy their demands.

Yes it's about money, yes i'd take any properly reviewed bid by a multi-billionaire in a heartbeat. Any who wouldn't take an opportunity like that with open arms because of their skewed sense of morality (in the entertainment industry) should stop following Villa and football as a whole rather than just threaten to do so. The bubble isn't bursting in our lifetimes so go and watch Tom Daley jump off a board instead or something.

I'd much rather our league stayed how it is to be honest, it's a good thing and we should all learn to appreciate it before people with money start looking elsewhere (which has begun already) because of our nonsensical stipulations and high taxes. I would rather the Russian League wasn't the 'one to watch' thank you very much. We compete in the best league in the world however cliche it is to say, it's the truth. I still enjoy watching the villa compete in it no matter how futile some would consider it to be.

one of the best posts I have read on this site in the last three years

Yet strangely, full of inaccuracies.

The basic trends might be the same but it has been blown well out of proportion these days.

Up until the mid 90's there was a league full of teams (22 at the time) that all had a hope of winning the title at the start of the season, including those just promoted. It was hard to predict who would go down and many of the teams that eventually did go would have had aspirations of a much higher finish. Realistic aspirations too.

The fact is we are entering a competition, year in, year out, that we can not win. Would you buy a lottery ticket if you knew before and there was absolutely no chance of winning?

[PieFacE]

No thanks, Don't want to be a plastic club.

I don't understand this.

When Randy took over the reason we finished as high as 6th is because we spent more than everyone below us. The reason Man City finish top is because they spend more than everyone below them. Are we a plastic club for finishing 6th in the same way as Man City finished 1st?

All we did was the same thing just on a lesser scale (simply because we didnt have the funds).....

[villa89]

No thanks, Don't want to be a plastic club.

Can you explain what this means? What's a plastic club exactly? Is it one that buys players? One that pays high wages? One that wins things?

It infuriates me when people try to belittle Chelsea and Man City for "buying success" and then go on to praise Man Utd./Arsenal for doing it the "right" way. All clubs in the premier league since it has been founded have bought the title. Its just the reality of football. People seem to get jealous of City and Chelsea because they were unsuccessful, "small" clubs and accuse them of being plastic. They don't seem to have the same jealousy when it comes to Man Utd. buying the title, maybe they just enjoy the status quo. i.e. "its okay to see united buying the title every year but I'll be damned if I'm going to watch Fulham/Stoke/etc. do it...".

[stanthemanisgod]

No thanks, Don't want to be a plastic club.

Can you explain what this means? What's a plastic club exactly? Is it one that buys players? One that pays high wages? One that wins things?

It infuriates me when people try to belittle Chelsea and Man City for "buying success" and then go on to praise Man Utd./Arsenal for doing it the "right" way. All clubs in the premier league since it has been founded have bought the title. Its just the reality of football. People seem to get jealous of City and Chelsea because they were unsuccessful, "small" clubs and accuse them of being plastic. They don't seem to have the same jealousy when it comes to Man Utd. buying the title, maybe they just enjoy the status quo. i.e. "its okay to see united buying the title every year but I'll be damned if I'm going to watch Fulham/Stoke/etc. do it...".

All good points, although it seems to the majority they are unable to see the way Utd have bought success because they've been doing it gradually for 20 years, for the last 10 it's just business as normal for Utd, not like these Johnny jump up clubs tha get a rich owner a superstar manager and spend £400m quid in 2 years! etc etc.

I get annoyed when people look back at our history and say if only we were more like Arsenal.... Well Arsenal did not just stumble across a decent youth set up and win the league, the supplemented the quality youth they acquired with a fair number of good players on wages that we could only dream of playing at that time. Their policy has changed somewhat since then and now they're 6 years without a trophy, and only really doing anything on the basis of their CL status which is looking increasingly shakey under pressure from Spurs and Newcastle, if Liverpool finally sort themselves out then Arsenal will be in proper trouble.

It takes a combination of money and success to get the best players, if you have no success to speak of then you need more money. But the best players will generally always want to play for the best teams, and they happen to be the ones that are paying the highest wages.

However, UEFA seem intent on protecting the current big boys by preventing another Cityesque rise to the big time.

[villa89]

But the best players will generally always want to play for the best teams, and they happen to be the ones that are paying the highest wages.

Slight correction here, The best players will generally always want to play for the teams paying the highest wages, i.e Man City, Man Utd. Anzhi Makhachkala. And then as a result of this those rich clubs win things, its rarely about the club and nearly always about the money.

If it was the case that the best players wanted to play for the best clubs, then those best clubs could actually pay less wages as player's would be willing to take a pay cut just to play there. Of course that's not the case.

[AVFCforever1991]

True, look at the Luka Modric situation, although think he wanted to leave to win Silverware.

[villa89]

True, look at the Luka Modric situation, although think he wanted to leave to win Silverware.

Do you think he'd have left spurs for Real Madrid if he had to take a pay cut? Money is what its about, the possibility of sliverware is just an added bonus.

One thing to note is that I don't think players are to blame in any of this. They have short careers and its fair enough they seek out the best contracts they can get, I'd do the exact same.

[stanthemanisgod]

True, look at the Luka Modric situation, although think he wanted to leave to win Silverware.

Do you think he'd have left spurs for Real Madrid if he had to take a pay cut? Money is what its about, the possibility of sliverware is just an added bonus.

One thing to note is that I don't think players are to blame in any of this. They have short careers and its fair enough they seek out the best contracts they can get, I'd do the exact same.

Difficult situation that, you would expect that a 'promotion' to a bigger club would normally attract a pay rise.

The issue become when clubs like Chelsea and City start their spending spree, neither were big clubs and netiehr were winning things it was all about the money.

Now you could see from the first and even second wave of players they bought the majority of really good players were happy earning less at Barca, Real and Utd etc. I mean Rooney could have got £250-300k a week if he'd moved straight over to City, but he chose to stick with Utd.

Obviously now that those initial buying periods are done City and Chelsea can offer top players top wages and the chance of meaningful silverware, they are now big clubs.

But imo the very best players would rather be earning £100k a week at Utd than say £150k a week at the next club trying to buy success (QPR maybe?).

[dudevillaisnice]

True, look at the Luka Modric situation, although think he wanted to leave to win Silverware.

Do you think he'd have left spurs for Real Madrid if he had to take a pay cut? Money is what its about, the possibility of sliverware is just an added bonus.

One thing to note is that I don't think players are to blame in any of this. They have short careers and its fair enough they seek out the best contracts they can get, I'd do the exact same.

Difficult situation that, you would expect that a 'promotion' to a bigger club would normally attract a pay rise.

The issue become when clubs like Chelsea and City start their spending spree, neither were big clubs and netiehr were winning things it was all about the money.

Now you could see from the first and even second wave of players they bought the majority of really good players were happy earning less at Barca, Real and Utd etc. I mean Rooney could have got £250-300k a week if he'd moved straight over to City, but he chose to stick with Utd.

Obviously now that those initial buying periods are done City and Chelsea can offer top players top wages and the chance of meaningful silverware, they are now big clubs.

But imo the very best players would rather be earning £100k a week at Utd than say £150k a week at the next club trying to buy success (QPR maybe?).

Agree.