Go fuck yourselves FSG

[BCM]

Owners who invest when it needs it. We are not looking to pay 50 million and 200 grand in wages but haggling over a million or two for Dempsey, the fact we even have to look at Dempsey for a start. It's the lowered expectations that kills me the most all these owners making me accept LFC is mediocre and not to expect much more. A lottery winning city fan coming on here like Jesus in his sandals giving us his wisdom and a glimpse at his glory. Selling our superstar player to fucking Chelsea and him wanting to go their because he wants success.

 

The thought of becoming arsenal kills me. A club that's in the competitions but just to make up the numbers and collect the cheques, who sells its captain and superstar player to a club it's had so much rivalry and shit with and didn't have the bollox a to do what ferguson did with heinze and say anybody but them we'll even make a loss. We should of done it with lady boy. Slowly but surely they have deflated us. I want owners with ambition that doesn't nesserily mean I want sugar daddy owners.

 

Cracking post mate, feel much the same.

[KopOut]

For all the fucking talk by Henry and co about long term rebuilding, developing and selling at a profit our youth (goodbye Stirling?) - I doubt our owners will stomach their own medicine given the worst case scenario this season. There is no way they will give BR a shot at promotion.

[xerxes]

Why does the choice have to be only between what we currently have and City like spending?

 

City have shown what it takes to crack the top four and make a title bid. Villa with their early splurge under Lerner, and ourselves last season, are eveidence that a few hundred million in fees and enhanced wages is neither here nor there.

[satmann]

Don't think they have a clue what their are doing and don't want to put money in.

[Jairzinho]

City have shown what it takes to crack the top four and make a title bid. Villa with their early splurge under Lerner, and ourselves last season, are eveidence that a few hundred million in fees and enhanced wages is neither here nor there.

 

I think top four can be achieved with a lot less money than City spent. There was absolutely no thought or structure to their spending at all. Within a period of two or three years huge signings were made and then disregarded, such was their complete lack of patience. They had about nine strikers at one point, all on at least 80k p/w.

 

It was never going to happen at Villa because they had a mediocre British manager signing mediocre British players.

 

I think we'd have had a good shot of getting in the top four last season had Dalglish stuck with most of the players, and playing style, of his first six months at the club. We wouldn't have needed to spent huge amounts.

 

Look at Newcastle last season, how close they were. Half their squad built on the sale of Carroll.

 

Of course money matters, but with clever scouting, and a pragmatic manager there is no reason why you can't overachieve relative to what you have spend. Too many fucking excuses are made.

 

As soon as you allow expectations to shift too far, well, expectations shift, too far.

[Gym Beglin]

I don't ever want to spend over £750,000 on a player ever again, we can get everything we need from the lower leagues, I'm convinced of it.

[silverlining]

I don't ever want to spend over £750,000 on a player ever again, we can get everything we need from the lower leagues, I'm convinced of it.

 

Yes, but you're mental

[Guest Slim(fast)Shady]

"terrified of becoming Arsenal"

 

Would settle for becoming Arsenal...

 

I'm more concerned of becoming Forest or Leeds!

[FanchesterCity]

It's true that City's spending was wild, but there was a reason for it...

 

The FFP drawbridge was looking ominous and if a team wanted to get on board before the ship set sail, it had to do so rapidly. City wasted a lot of money in the process, but in reality, like almost all clubs, it seems to be a 50/50 hit or miss affair with most signings these days, just that City's were expensive... AND they were held to ransom over some players.

 

There was no other option for City. It would have been impossible to break into the top 4 in such a short period of time without spending megabucks. Even if they'd spent with a little more common sense, it might have taken them 5 years to still be hovering in 4/5/6th place... meaning only a 33% chance of CL.

 

The game is f**ked. Either smaller clubs concede to United, Liverpool, Arsenal, or they have to spend like Chelsea, City and Spurs (to a lesser extent). Chelsea have been spending big for 10 years, so will take a lot of catching up.

 

The only club that really comes out of it with any real credit is probably Arsenal (in footballing terms), but they are shafting the fans on a scale far worse than most clubs, and there is still a distinct unrest amongst fans.

 

The money in the game has done a great deal of good, but it's brought with it some sad facts:

 

- The 'elite' clubs in Europe are becoming more and more apart from the rest since the advent of CL

- The Premier League's success has opened the door for foreign owners to buy our clubs. since they are now seen as more global than ever before.

- A Paisley or a Ferguson comes around once or twice in a lifetime... and neither fans nor owners are prepared to wait for one. Therefore, the rest of the world feels forced to buy their best players (rather than grow them).

- Even if you want to set up a top academy system... it takes time AND money.

 

In the old days, the odd 'plucky' club could muster up some success. But even Forest had to pay handsomely to win the European Cup. Even Liverpool were buying the best players money could buy. United have been buying the very best for 20 years... though credit where it's due, it can't be denied they were blessed with a crop of youngsters the likes of which hasn't been seen since (in terms of number and quality combined).

 

But now the gap is wider than ever, unless you've got a sugar daddy, or amazing manager, clubs stand no chance of serious sustained success (emphasis on sustained).

 

This was all predicted when PL was formed, and the CL invented. But all the big clubs wanted more money for themselves... and they got it.

The monster they created is now slowly killing the game.

 

Chelsea and City aren't the cause... they are symptoms. The root cause is the widening gap between 'haves' and 'have nots' brought about through CL and PL money.

[ngogswilly]

Yes, but you're mental

 

My coffee nearly ended up all over the screen there :lol:

[stringvest]

It's perfectly aligned with Funneeees policy of never spending more than £49 on a suit.

[shouter]

Owners who invest when it needs it. We are not looking to pay 50 million and 200 grand in wages but haggling over a million or two for Dempsey, the fact we even have to look at Dempsey for a start. It's the lowered expectations that kills me the most all these owners making me accept LFC is mediocre and not to expect much more. A lottery winning city fan coming on here like Jesus in his sandals giving us his wisdom and a glimpse at his glory. Selling our superstar player to fucking Chelsea and him wanting to go their because he wants success.

 

The thought of becoming arsenal kills me. A club that's in the competitions but just to make up the numbers and collect the cheques, who sells its captain and superstar player to a club it's had so much rivalry and shit with and didn't have the bollox a to do what ferguson did with heinze and say anybody but them we'll even make a loss. We should of done it with lady boy. Slowly but surely they have deflated us. I want owners with ambition that doesn't nesserily mean I want sugar daddy owners.

spot on fella.

[xerxes]

1.I think top four can be achieved with a lot less money than City spent. There was absolutely no thought or structure to their spending at all. Within a period of two or three years huge signings were made and then disregarded, such was their complete lack of patience. They had about nine strikers at one point, all on at least 80k p/w.

 

2.It was never going to happen at Villa because they had a mediocre British manager signing mediocre British players.

 

3.I think we'd have had a good shot of getting in the top four last season had Dalglish stuck with most of the players, and playing style, of his first six months at the club. We wouldn't have needed to spent huge amounts.

 

4.Look at Newcastle last season, how close they were. Half their squad built on the sale of Carroll.

 

5.Of course money matters, but with clever scouting, and a pragmatic manager there is no reason why you can't overachieve relative to what you have spend. Too many fucking excuses are made.

 

6.As soon as you allow expectations to shift too far, well, expectations shift, too far.

 

1.Fourth place will always be up for grabs as a Spurs/Newcastle/ Everton style purple patch can combine with a bad season by one of the present incumbents. But I think we are looking for a permanent return. I disagree with your analysis of City. Their strategy was clear, by the best that is available for whatever it takes in fees and wages. It has worked.

 

2.I also disagree with your analysis of Villa, with a big lesson there for us. Nationality is irrelevant. MoN delivered three successive top six finishes, a record Rodgers is unlikely to emulate, the best result of any Villa manager in modern times. The only thing that stopped them, resulting in Young, Milner, and Barry joining top four sides was that Villa stopped spending. That danger looms large for us.

 

3.In the same way that Hodgson faced a perfect storm of misfortune upon his appointment, so KK bathed in a bright spring of good fortune. As soon as he had to take decisions rather than motivate, things started to unravel. That honeymoon was never going to last.

 

4.Newcastle are now ruthlessly well run by a hands on Chairman who has learned fast- the Villa lesson looms though. Stop spending and you will be running on empty.

 

5.There are virtually no examples of title and CL winning teams who have not spent big. I agree that good management and good scouting go a long way. Our problem has been not that we have failed to overachieve, it is that we have consistently failed to secure value in the transfer market in recent years.

 

6.I emphatically agree with you about expectations- look at the job Steve Clarke is doing at West Brom.

[Coro]

 

3.In the same way that Hodgson faced a perfect storm of misfortune upon his appointment, so KK bathed in a bright spring of good fortune. As soon as he had to take decisions rather than motivate, things started to unravel. That honeymoon was never going to last.

 

Fuck off Xerxes

[Arl arse]

Owners who invest when it needs it. We are not looking to pay 50 million and 200 grand in wages but haggling over a million or two for Dempsey, the fact we even have to look at Dempsey for a start. It's the lowered expectations that kills me the most all these owners making me accept LFC is mediocre and not to expect much more. A lottery winning city fan coming on here like Jesus in his sandals giving us his wisdom and a glimpse at his glory. Selling our superstar player to fucking Chelsea and him wanting to go their because he wants success.

 

The thought of becoming arsenal kills me. A club that's in the competitions but just to make up the numbers and collect the cheques, who sells its captain and superstar player to a club it's had so much rivalry and shit with and didn't have the bollox a to do what ferguson did with heinze and say anybody but them we'll even make a loss. We should of done it with lady boy. Slowly but surely they have deflated us. I want owners with ambition that doesn't nesserily mean I want sugar daddy owners.

 

Bobby, your only spot on mate.

 

Fuckin well said.

[BCM]

 

5.There are virtually no examples of title and CL winning teams who have not spent big. I agree that good management and good scouting go a long way. Our problem has been not that we have failed to overachieve, it is that we have consistently failed to secure value in the transfer market in recent years.

 

One fucking short memory.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

5.There are virtually no examples of title and CL winning teams who have not spent big.

 

[Harry Squatter]

Owners who invest when it needs it. We are not looking to pay 50 million and 200 grand in wages but haggling over a million or two for Dempsey, the fact we even have to look at Dempsey for a start. It's the lowered expectations that kills me the most all these owners making me accept LFC is mediocre and not to expect much more. A lottery winning city fan coming on here like Jesus in his sandals giving us his wisdom and a glimpse at his glory. Selling our superstar player to fucking Chelsea and him wanting to go their because he wants success.

 

The thought of becoming arsenal kills me. A club that's in the competitions but just to make up the numbers and collect the cheques, who sells its captain and superstar player to a club it's had so much rivalry and shit with and didn't have the bollox a to do what ferguson did with heinze and say anybody but them we'll even make a loss. We should of done it with lady boy. Slowly but surely they have deflated us. I want owners with ambition that doesn't nesserily mean I want sugar daddy owners.

 

 

Immense

[FanchesterCity]

You can't say you want owners with ambition, not necessarily money, and in the same breath be willing to just find a few extra million for a player, or be willing to make a loss of a player to prove a point....

 

Where's this money coming from?

 

Should Liverpool have turned down 50m for Torres and let him rot? or was it good business?

 

Football has ALWAYS been a pissing contest between rich owners, but instead of it being local millionaires, it's now international billionaires.

 

Fans say it's passion and ambition they care about the most, then start measuring ambition in terms of funds.

 

It's ok to have a principle in not selling a player to a rival, but it's wrong to have a principle that won't pay a few extra million if another club demands it?

 

Most clubs are spending money they haven't got... and it's still not good enough for the fans.

 

Do fans REALLY just want owners with ambition? no, they are lying. They want owners with ambition and money... ergo a Sugar Daddy. Call them 'investors' if it helps, but the fact of the matter is, all fans want their owners to put their hands in their pockets. That's a sugar daddy no matter which way you look at it.

 

Arsenal are getting stick for being 'also rans', largely because they won't spend, or they are selling top players.

 

Which way do you REALLY want it fellas?

[Ranxerox]

Things will only turn around when we are finally sold to Sheikh Mohammed Fuckpants.

 

thats Mr. Sheik Mohammed Fuckpants to you.

[TheHowieLama]

Anyone spending more money than their business generates without a proven way of recouping it and a defined period of time to do so - with interest - is a fool or a fella with a toy.

This generation of football owners is chock full of both.

[Ranxerox]

 

I hate to sound racist but he looks German (possibly even of the U-Boat ilk)

[dirk grout]

 

I see your Klopp and raise you a Benitez.

 

[Jairzinho]

 

What. Ever.

[xerxes]

Dortmund have income of over 100m euro's a year and signed Reus for 17,5m euros, in the financially more sanely structured Bundesliga they are no paupers.