Do City leave you cold?

footballistic orgasm said:
What's your definition of history though? Because I'm pretty sure every EPL team has a history.

If we're being honest, City has produced some of the most exciting games with crazy scenarios in the CL in the past 5 years. The only thing is that they've always been on the losing end of those games/ties.
Click to expand...

City were shit before the takeover. Chelsea were much better before their takeover. City are manufactured. With all their billions and supposedly the best manager in the world, they've got 0 to show for it internationally. They haven't been able to attract fans either, because they're boring. Their players have no character, they're just robots performing their tasks. They can sub the whole team and you'd barely notice.

The fact that United fans prefer City winning the league is telling. City are not taken seriously. It could change in the future, but they have a long way to go.
 
Kanu said:
City were shit before the takeover. Chelsea were much better before their takeover. City are manufactured. With all their billions and supposedly the best manager in the world, they've got 0 to show for it internationally. They haven't been able to attract fans either, because they're boring. Their players have no character, they're just robots performing their tasks. They can sub the whole team and you'd barely notice.

The fact that United fans prefer City winning the league is telling. City are not taken seriously. It could change in the future, but they have a long way to go.
Click to expand...
It's difficult to respond to your 1st paragraph because it reads as too emotional.
So only good teams should be invested in?
Their players having no character is subjective (and not true at all IMO), and so is the boring aspect about their style. Though is weird to consider a team that creates and scores as much as they do boring.
They've definitely gained more fans worldwide (not as much as PSG though), suggesting otherwise is just false.
Them being able to sub the whole team and it not showing will be a testament to how good their coach is if it was really the case, but it isn't and you know it.

United fans preferring City to win the league is mostly down to not wanting Liverpool to have more titles, City's still far away.
 
footballistic orgasm said:
It's difficult to respond to your 1st paragraph because it reads as too emotional.
So only good teams should be invested in?
Their players having no character is subjective (and not true at all IMO), and so is the boring aspect about their style. Though is weird to consider a team that creates and scores as much as they do boring.
They've definitely gained more fans worldwide (not as much as PSG though), suggesting otherwise is just false.
Them being able to sub the whole team and it not showing will be a testament to how good their coach is if it was really the case, but it isn't and you know it.

United fans preferring City to win the league is mostly down to not wanting Liverpool to have more titles, City's still far away.
Click to expand...

Well obviously they've attracted a couple plastic fans since the takeover, that goes without saying. Not on the scale they hoped for, though. I think it's because their brand as a club is boring as hell. I tried explaining why I think that. It's just my opinion and yes that's subjective.
 
croadyman said:
Have made this point many times but seems to get lost by many people in the media. They clearly got word from that Stoke v Bolton game and Barton being sent off seemed a set up too.
Click to expand...

Don't think the Barton sending off was a set up. Think he would have delighted in denying City the title as i don't think he had any real love for the club. He seemed to think he'd been harshly treated after assaulting 2 of his team mates.

QPR definately threw the game when they knew they were safe. I remember that after City equalised QPR kicked the ball straight back to City at the kick off. It's something i'd never seen before & have never seen since. Why would a side 1 goal away from relegation immediately gift the ball to their oponents having just conceded. The game was coming to a close. They could have just kicked the ball back to the keeper & run the clock down. The winning goal was also dodgy as Paddy Kenny dives over the ball rather than staying low.

I was surprised alot more wasn't made of this. The media wouldn't mention anything about it as they are mostly ABU's & were creaming themselves at the greatest end to a PL season. The club should have created a shitstorm over it though. What QPR did totally goes against the spirit of the game. Lot's of players & clubs have threw games but there was at least an element of subtletly in their deception. QPR couldn't have made it any more obvious. SAF did allude to it saying he wanted all final day PL games to end at the same time. This is a practical impossibility though.

It worked out ok in the end as SAF ended up with his perfect send off & sent Mancini packing to boot. It's still disapointing to lose a title on the last day with your challengers gifted a win.
 
Kanu said:
Well obviously they've attracted a couple plastic fans since the takeover, that goes without saying. Not on the scale they hoped for, though. I think it's because their brand as a club is boring as hell. I tried explaining why I think that. It's just my opinion and yes that's subjective.
Click to expand...
Is every United fan who doesn't live in Manchester and started supporting United when United was winning titles a plastic fan?

The City also matters in a teams popularity IMO, it's difficult to have two very popular teams in cities that aren't too popular. Manchester is no London or Paris.
 
ExecutionerWasp001 said:
Don't think the Barton sending off was a set up. Think he would have delighted in denying City the title as i don't think he had any real love for the club. He seemed to think he'd been harshly treated after assaulting 2 of his team mates.

QPR definately threw the game when they knew they were safe. I remember that after City equalised QPR kicked the ball straight back to City at the kick off. It's something i'd never seen before & have never seen since. Why would a side 1 goal away from relegation immediately gift the ball to their oponents having just conceded. The game was coming to a close. They could have just kicked the ball back to the keeper & run the clock down. The winning goal was also dodgy as Paddy Kenny dives over the ball rather than staying low.

I was surprised alot more wasn't made of this. The media wouldn't mention anything about it as they are mostly ABU's & were creaming themselves at the greatest end to a PL season. The club should have created a shitstorm over it though. What QPR did totally goes against the spirit of the game. Lot's of players & clubs have threw games but there was at least an element of subtletly in their deception. QPR couldn't have made it any more obvious. SAF did allude to it saying he wanted all final day PL games to end at the same time. This is a practical impossibility though.

It worked out ok in the end as SAF ended up with his perfect send off & sent Mancini packing to boot. It's still disapointing to lose a title on the last day with your challengers gifted a win.
Click to expand...

Yeah they definitely weren't as intense once word had reached they were safe and Bolton were down
 
footballistic orgasm said:
Is every United fan who doesn't live in Manchester and started supporting United when United was winning titles a plastic fan?

The City also matters in a teams popularity IMO, it's difficult to have two very popular teams in cities that aren't too popular. Manchester is no London or Paris.
Click to expand...

I don't think the city matters, especially for foreign fans. If City had a rich history, then they would probably have a lot more fans.

Regarding your first point: United fans who became a fan during the good years might be bandwagoners, but for me it's a different ball park compared to supporting a recently manufactured oil club.
 
Kanu said:
I don't think the city matters, especially for foreign fans. If City had a rich history, then they would probably have a lot more fans.

Regarding your first point: United fans who became a fan during the good years might be bandwagoners, but for me it's a different ball park compared to supporting a recently manufactured oil club.
Click to expand...
I highly doubt foreign fans care about history. I can tell u 99% fans in China or Asia can not point out where Manchester is on the map. Winning title increase popularity, has the best player in the team helps marketing. Has an attractive playing style win you fans. History does nothing for marketing.
 
City are around 5-7 years ahead of United as it stands, but United have the reputation and prestige.

Issue for United is, they only realistically have a few more years to a decade before United are just a historical club, that is respected as a name but on the field not so much.

United are turning into the likes of Inter in the 90s and 2010 that just fell away, the same with Liverpool in the 90s.

Needs a big manager and the right people off the field to bring on the field success. Not sure how long itll take to review.

Thing with City is, and I lived in the UAE for 5 years before I recently moved, is the UAE listen to experts. They take expert opinions and they build things like the Burj Khalifa, or they implement road systems based on what works, the same with public infrastructure. They literally have a blank cheque book and hire the best, listen to the best and they win.

United suffer from "the innovators dilemma" where they were used to success and didn't really change, and they essentially get usurped by the new kid on the block. Once SAF was gone it was always going to be difficult, but it shouldn't have been this difficult it's been 9 years now.

City don't leave me cold, Uniteds failure to adapt leaves me cold. United have the resources to compete with City but they continually appoint the wrong people at ever level of the club.
 
ThierryHenry14 said:
I highly doubt foreign fans care about history. I can tell u 99% fans in China or Asia can not point out where Manchester is on the map.
Click to expand...

It does matter though because people often hear stories from their family members or people around growing up. Its also why I said in an earlier comment that if City keep on dominating, it will only be a matter of time that they will be big/prestigious, but they still have a long way to go to become as big as United/Liverpool.
 
Kanu said:
It does matter though because people often hear stories from their family members or people around growing up. Its also why I said in an earlier comment that if City keep on dominating, it will only be a matter of time that they will be big/prestigious, but they still have a long way to go to become as big as United/Liverpool.
Click to expand...
Yeah I heard stories about Milan's success back in 80/90s and no one cares about them now.
 
Kanu said:
It does matter though because people often hear stories from their family members or people around growing up. Its also why I said in an earlier comment that if City keep on dominating, it will only be a matter of time that they will be big/prestigious, but they still have a long way to go to become as big as United/Liverpool.
Click to expand...
This was the case before, but it isn't so much now IMO. That's why you'll see different people supporting different clubs in the same family.
The period where people supported a club just because their dad supported them too, is coming to an end IMO (though i still think it's different for people who live in the same city as the club they support).
 
In terms of Chelsea vs City pre-takeovers, in addition to Chelsea being considerably stronger with their flurry of trophies from 1997-2000, 3rd-6th place finishes every year from 1997-2003, Champions League quarter-final appearance in 2000 etc., they already seemed like a ‘glamorous’ club beforehand, with a lot of potential to become a big global brand. That was helped by the numerous big name players such as Gullit, Zola, Vialli, Desailly etc., that they’d attracted, their West London location etc. Of course that, alongside the pretty cheap buying price attracted Abramovich in the first place.

IIRC pre-takeoever they were already spending similar amounts to, if not more than Arsenal. They had the highest wage bill in the league in 2000/2001, and then spent pretty extravagantly on new signings during the summer of 2001. Before then they had paid big money at the time for the likes of Sutton, Hasselbaink, Gronkjaer etc.
 
MUW4Eva said:
Yes you did on both counts, you said that my season ticket wasn't as important as a men's one, all season tickets no matter fir which team are just as important, they show a commitment to the club.

But let's not continue to get personal here, let's please try to stay with what the thread is actually all about.
Click to expand...

I did not say it was less important. I said a season ticket for the womens team costs less than one ticket for the mens. Is that not correct?
I also said that you have said you are ditching the mens team in favour of the womens team. If you then come back and tell me you have bought a season ticket then its natural to assume its for the womens team, no? Look at the context of what is being said.
I also didn't blame you for the era you were born into, I blamed you for ditching the mens team you have "supported" all your life now that they aren't at the top of the tree and switched your support to another team. Thats glory hunting is it not? As opposed to sticking with one team through thick and thin?

No personal insults there.
 
adexkola said:
This thread does have a whiff of "the lady doth protest too much", for a club that apparently no one cares about.
Click to expand...
I've always found people who continue posting about how they don't care about City, very funny. I mean, why bother posting over and over about a club you don't care about (especially just to remind everyone that they don't care)? Almost as if they want to convince themselves, by repeating it as much as they can.
 
9 Stone Elvis said:
I did not say it was less important. I said a season ticket for the womens team costs less than one ticket for the mens. Is that not correct?
I also said that you have said you are ditching the mens team in favour of the womens team. If you then come back and tell me you have bought a season ticket then its natural to assume its for the womens team, no? Look at the context of what is being said.
I also didn't blame you for the era you were born into, I blamed you for ditching the mens team you have "supported" all your life now that they aren't at the top of the tree and switched your support to another team. Thats glory hunting is it not? As opposed to sticking with one team through thick and thin?

No personal insults there.
Click to expand...

How on earth is it switching from one team to another, you make ot sound as if I am now supporting Coventry or Luton (to pick but two random sides), rather than still the same club.
I am very much still supporting the same club, that is simply never going to change.


Look, we are seemingly not going to agree here, so best to leave this now, you have issues with what I have said, fair enough, you can't please all of the people all of the time, I get that.

So please let's stop this personal attacks, & get back to the topic at hand.
 
Kanu said:
No one cares about Milan?
Click to expand...
Sponsorship revenue truly reflect the popularity of a team.

Copied from the internet

Rossoneri actually increased the value of their sponsorships from €36.6m in 2019-20 to €54m in 2020-21.

Manchester United presently have the most lucrative kit deal in the English top-flight, with German sportswear giant Adidas paying the club around $99 million per season.

This is followed by Liverpool’s deal with rival brand Nike, which began last year and is worth $92.4 million annually, while Manchester City’s deal with Puma comes in at third, valued at $85.8 million per annum.

Chelsea ($79.2 million per year deal with Nike) and Arsenal ($79.2 million per year deal with Adidas) make up the top five.

Clubs can not rely on their past glory forever.
 
adexkola said:
Ah, those bastards paying Puma to inflate their sponsorship figures
Click to expand...
Man Utd built a huge fan base back in 90s and 2000s and it will last them for another 20 years even they stay where they are now. They have the resources to turn it around.
 
ShinjiNinja26 said:
Well that’s bollocks when you’ve got clubs like City sponsoring themselves.
Click to expand...

Aside from oil is true though, a sponsor goes after success because people associate the brand with the team. It's what branding does.

It's how human psychology works and marketing wants to be associated with the best teams.
 
FCBarcelona said:
You might be a long standing PSG fan, most of them are new.

But it is what it is. Over decades I've seen an amazing Barça and very mediocre ones (waaaay worse than today). Same applies for every team. It is fine, that's how football and sport works.
Those big "established clubs" gained their "aura" in the field, playing, and winning through time. It does not apply to the likes of current City/PSG.
You like it or not, nobody value, respect or admire what you've done in the last decade. You can enjoy it for sure. No one will take it from you.

For our own mess (a president who should be in jail) we haven't been able (and we won't be for a few years at least) to "fight" for those "shiny toys" and it is fine. It is well deserved. So I don't care about anyone "stealing" anything from us. But I find 0 value in what you or City could get. Like me, most of the world football fans.

Enjoy your titles, but don't ask for any recognision because you won't find it.
Click to expand...
No one cares about your recognition. People in Paris will be as happy as they can be and the rest of the world won't be, if we did win a CL, which is pretty much what happens to any team.

And ten, fifteen, twenty years from now, no one will remember or cares how they got there, all that will be remembered is they won. Real Madrid is the biggest club in the world, they also happened to be the King's club and there's a dirty laundry list of items that can explain how they got to where they are that pales in comparison to what QSI has done with PSG. So I'm not going to take lessons of value, respect, or admiration from anybody that's a football fan because they all act like their own shit doesn't stink. I don't care about Barcelona enough to look into their own history, but I'm sure you have plenty of skeletons in your closet as well, and I just don't care. The reason people care or are upset about PSG is because it's disrupting the established order of those big clubs who are so used to bullying everybody to get what they want, and now they not only don't get to bully a French club, but they get bullied themselves.

I'm sorry it's upsetting, but I'm loving it. France on its own will never compete with Spain or England as far as league revenue and interest, but it's nice to see Real Madrid and Barcelona (among others) told to feck off.
 
Love see them blowing it in Europe.
Would love to see them bottle the league if it was anyone other that Liverpool chasing them.

They are a nothing club, corrupt and definitely pay more than they are reporting imo.

Will be reluctantly cheering for them tomorrow. Their league win will mean nothing, other than stops a Quadruple.

I can admit they play good football, KdB is the best in the league and Pep is very good, but I can't respect how they have put this all together.
 
FCBarcelona said:
You might be a long standing PSG fan, most of them are new.

But it is what it is. Over decades I've seen an amazing Barça and very mediocre ones (waaaay worse than today). Same applies for every team. It is fine, that's how football and sport works.
Those big "established clubs" gained their "aura" in the field, playing, and winning through time. It does not apply to the likes of current City/PSG.
You like it or not, nobody value, respect or admire what you've done in the last decade. You can enjoy it for sure. No one will take it from you.

For our own mess (a president who should be in jail) we haven't been able (and we won't be for a few years at least) to "fight" for those "shiny toys" and it is fine. It is well deserved. So I don't care about anyone "stealing" anything from us. But I find 0 value in what you or City could get. Like me, most of the world football fans.

Enjoy your titles, but don't ask for any recognision because you won't find it.
Click to expand...

You are being cocky tbh, we keep saying nobody cares about City's success, but that is because Liverpool is strong, if they were not the one chasing title, we would have been worried about City. Success brings fans. And City is having abundance of that, it is slow and gradual but eventually they will gain a strong hold world wide. And that is what matters in today's football with globalisation.
 
I guess they never had so many rooting for them to win as this last match to stop Liverpool. Savor that feeling Cityzens!
 
Mercurial said:
I guess they never had so many rooting for them to win as this last match to stop Liverpool. Savor that feeling Cityzens!
Click to expand...
This.
I watched their game yesterday over ours.
Never thought I’d see that day but that’s what happened. I cheered all of their goals like they were ours. I suppose that’s how much I dislike the Pool.
 
TheNewEra said:
City are around 5-7 years ahead of United as it stands, but United have the reputation and prestige.

Issue for United is, they only realistically have a few more years to a decade before United are just a historical club, that is respected as a name but on the field not so much.

United are turning into the likes of Inter in the 90s and 2010 that just fell away, the same with Liverpool in the 90s.

Needs a big manager and the right people off the field to bring on the field success. Not sure how long itll take to review.

Thing with City is, and I lived in the UAE for 5 years before I recently moved, is the UAE listen to experts. They take expert opinions and they build things like the Burj Khalifa, or they implement road systems based on what works, the same with public infrastructure. They literally have a blank cheque book and hire the best, listen to the best and they win.

United suffer from "the innovators dilemma" where they were used to success and didn't really change, and they essentially get usurped by the new kid on the block. Once SAF was gone it was always going to be difficult, but it shouldn't have been this difficult it's been 9 years now.

City don't leave me cold, Uniteds failure to adapt leaves me cold. United have the resources to compete with City but they continually appoint the wrong people at ever level of the club.
Click to expand...
True, they have listened to experts and implemented. Financial experts too, on how to avoid complying with rules like financial fair play and get away with it.
 
I wouldn’t be surprised if we end up wanting City to beat Newcastle to trophies as well. The Toon Army is going to be every bit as unbearable as Liverpool fans when it’s got something to shout about.
 
TheReligion said:
Their parade today is piss poor
Low numbers and zero atmosphere
Little City
Click to expand...

From what I've read it was the poorest turnout they've had for 1 of their parades. They just don't have the local fan base to make these parades look anything less than feeble.

I think Bernard Manning said it best ..
''If you go to Maine Rd & see 2 queues don't join the big 1 as that's for the chippy''
 
You must log in or register to reply here.