Who wants Man City to win the CL Saturday?

There’s a difference between a billionaire and an oil state.

Across the last 10 years, City's net spend is £965.49million comparing to Liverpool's balance of £338.06million. City have spent the best part of triple of what Liverpool have across the last 10 years.
Why look at 10 years and not 5, or 1 or 20 or 100?

Why are you only using Liverpool and not all the other mega rich clubs that they are competing with like Chelsea, Man Utd, Barcelona, Real Madrid, PSG, Bayern etc.

Those other big clubs have had decades of out spending the rest which put them in a position where they have a massive advantage. Man City had to spend more than the established teams to catch up to them. If we suddenly came into money and wanted to catch up to the top teams we couldn't do it by spending the same amount, we have to spend more. If you were in a race and you were last then you can't catch the front without going faster than them. Since they got to a point where they were competing they aren't spending as much.

There's no real difference between a billionaire and an oil state. They all have more money than they know how to spend so have "invested" in something fun. They have no connection to football, no connection to the club they've bought and no connection to the fans.

Because we used to have a league where it was possible for a team like ours to win the league. Now we don't. And I will support any team playing against this self serving cabal.
They are playing a team from the same cabal. Inter are owned by a Chinese billionaire. They are no different.
 
Fcuk city and fcuk the involvement of nation state backed wealth in football.

A successful business is one thing, a nation that uses the reputation and popularity of the beautiful game to clean its money and reputation is another.

I hope they, Newcastle and any other state backed side win naff all.

As for their whole city group thing. Grim.
 
Because we used to have a league where it was possible for a team like ours to win the league. Now we don't. And I will support any team playing against this self serving cabal.

Has it though? I mean we’ve never won it in 150 years, and I’d say there’s been three teams of a similar size to us win it in about 50 years, one of them in the last decade. I’d say it was as hard in the 70s and 80s to overcome Liverpools dominance than it is now.
For years people complained about how the Premier League was dominated by the same big 4 teams every year, and the fact that no one could break into it. Man City (who were a worse team than we are) have done the only thing possible to break that Status Quo, invest heavily, but people aren’t happy with that either.
 
Has it though? I mean we’ve never won it in 150 years, and I’d say there’s been three teams of a similar size to us win it in about 50 years, one of them in the last decade. I’d say it was as hard in the 70s and 80s to overcome Liverpools dominance than it is now.
For years people complained about how the Premier League was dominated by the same big 4 teams every year, and the fact that no one could break into it. Man City (who were a worse team than we are) have done the only thing possible to break that Status Quo, invest heavily, but people aren’t happy with that either.
The First Division/PL has always been dominated by a handful of teams - Liverpool, Man U, Arsenal, Chelsea.....with small cameos by Forest, Everton etc. Just how it's always been for 30-40 years.

Success breeds success etc.

But what's happened more recent times is that serious money has come into the game and success has been bought. On steroids. The likes of the Boro's of this world have been largely left behind, millionaire owners aren't enough, and more and more clubs have tried to keep up and have gone to the wall trying.

City certainly never started this, but are now complicit in the way money is ruining football for 99% of clubs through the whole league system.
 
The First Division/PL has always been dominated by a handful of teams - Liverpool, Man U, Arsenal, Chelsea.....with small cameos by Forest, Everton etc. Just how it's always been for 30-40 years.

Success breeds success etc.

But what's happened more recent times is that serious money has come into the game and success has been bought. On steroids. The likes of the Boro's of this world have been largely left behind, millionaire owners aren't enough, and more and more clubs have tried to keep up and have gone to the wall trying.

City certainly never started this, but are now complicit in the way money is ruining football for 99% of clubs through the whole league system.
Is it any different to what we tried (and failed) to do in the 90s? Juninho and Ravanelli weren't signing for us for any reason other than we were trying to buy success.
 
Is it any different to what we tried (and failed) to do in the 90s? Juninho and Ravanelli weren't signing for us for any reason other than we were trying to buy success.
No, but my point is it is now being carried out on steroids. In the 90s there were plenty of other similar sized clubs, financially equivalent and richer than Boro, Gibson dreamt big and it nearly paid off.

Now, the City's of the this world wouldn't blink about spending £100m on a player and paying him £300-500k week.......and somehow still complying with FFP.......🤔🤔

How do clubs the size of Boro compete now without risking massive debts and financial meltdown if things don't go to plan?

Our long term aim to get promoted, hang about bottom half of PL getting a few proper spankings before slinking back into the Championship?

But, as we will be financially secure that will be acceptable. It's a crazy set up.

🤷🏻‍♂️🤷🏻‍♂️
 
Because we used to have a league where it was possible for a team like ours to win the league. Now we don't. And I will support any team playing against this self serving cabal.
You must have stopped liking English football 50 years ago. Liverpool put paid to that ideal in the 70's.

Football Italia got a lot to answer for. 🤣 🤣 🤣
 
No, but my point is it is now being carried out on steroids. In the 90s there were plenty of other similar sized clubs, financially equivalent and richer than Boro, Gibson dreamt big and it nearly paid off.

Now, the City's of the this world wouldn't blink about spending £100m on a player and paying him £300-500k week.......and somehow still complying with FFP.......🤔🤔

How do clubs the size of Boro compete now without risking massive debts and financial meltdown if things don't go to plan?

Our long term aim to get promoted, hang about bottom half of PL getting a few proper spankings before slinking back into the Championship?

But, as we will be financially secure that will be acceptable. It's a crazy set up.

🤷🏻‍♂️🤷🏻‍♂️
The game has been stolen from under our feet fit snd proper ownership tests should have disqualified all these state owners. Maximum transfer fees wage caps stamp duty on club buy outs theres lots which could have been done. Unfortunately people and governments are frightened to say no to the petro dollar.
 
No, but my point is it is now being carried out on steroids. In the 90s there were plenty of other similar sized clubs, financially equivalent and richer than Boro, Gibson dreamt big and it nearly paid off.

Now, the City's of the this world wouldn't blink about spending £100m on a player and paying him £300-500k week.......and somehow still complying with FFP.......🤔🤔

How do clubs the size of Boro compete now without risking massive debts and financial meltdown if things don't go to plan?

Our long term aim to get promoted, hang about bottom half of PL getting a few proper spankings before slinking back into the Championship?

But, as we will be financially secure that will be acceptable. It's a crazy set up.

🤷🏻‍♂️🤷🏻‍♂️
It's no different. It's just scale. We tried to catch up to the top by out spending others. City do that now. They might spend £100m on a player and pay them £300k but so do all the teams they are competing with. All the money from the TV deals and champions league lets them do that.

I don't disagree that the amount of money in football is terrible and it's not a fair competition but I do disagree that Man City are a special case and them winning is any worse than Utd, Liverpool, Chelsea, Madrid or Inter.
 
It's no different. It's just scale. We tried to catch up to the top by out spending others. City do that now. They might spend £100m on a player and pay them £300k but so do all the teams they are competing with. All the money from the TV deals and champions league lets them do that.

I don't disagree that the amount of money in football is terrible and it's not a fair competition but I do disagree that Man City are a special case and them winning is any worse than Utd, Liverpool, Chelsea, Madrid or Inter.
citys owners have no interest in football apart from using as a sportswashing mechanism to distract from human rights abuses. Gibson is a local business man who loves his town and the football club. Its Completely fûcking different
 
citys owners have no interest in football apart from using as a sportswashing mechanism to distract from human rights abuses. Gibson is a local business man who loves his town and the football club. Its Completely fûcking different

Welll said it’s this pathetic argument from the non boro fan boo boys on here that seem to use any snd every post to turn on the club.

Of course it’s different and if you don’t see that then we can’t help you.
 
Back
Top