Do City leave you cold?

[j65454]

"Pep doesn’t do adversity really. Sir Alex stuck by during our no value phase and built a new period of success he created himself by developing younger stars and adding some smart signings (VDS, Evra, Park, Vidic etc). Pep would jump to PSG or Bayern to pad his tally if that happened. "

Man City have broken the British transfer record just twice in their entire history and not once under Pep. Man United have done it six times, three times under Fergie, four if you include Bryan Robson who played for him.

Fergie broke the transfer record doing his spell at United more times than City have in their entire 100+ year history in the game. On top of that he received a load of once in a lifetime gifts from the youth ranks in the likes of Scholes, Beckham, Neville and Giggs.


Fergie, adversity? Stealing legends and the best players off big clubs like Arsenal and Spurs isn't adversity!

The first time any club came up to match United's spending power, in Chelsea, United came worse off in a head to head with Mourinho in charge.

There is absolutely no question that United spent years buying the title. There was nothing fair in that. In fact, in some folks eyes they'd call it cheating too.

 

[Solius]

"Pep doesn’t do adversity really. Sir Alex stuck by during our no value phase and built a new period of success he created himself by developing younger stars and adding some smart signings (VDS, Evra, Park, Vidic etc). Pep would jump to PSG or Bayern to pad his tally if that happened. "

Man City have broken the British transfer record just twice in their entire history and not once under Pep. Man United have done it six times, three times under Fergie, four if you include Bryan Robson who played for him.

Fergie broke the transfer record doing his spell at United more times than City have in their entire 100+ year history in the game. On top of that he received a load of once in a lifetime gifts from the youth ranks in the likes of Scholes, Beckham, Neville and Giggs.


Fergie, adversity? Stealing legends and the best players off big clubs like Arsenal and Spurs isn't adversity!

The first time any club came up to match United's spending power, in Chelsea, United came worse off in a head to head with Mourinho in charge.

There is absolutely no question that United spent years buying the title. There was nothing fair in that. In fact, in some folks eyes they'd call it cheating too.

We earned the money we spent by being successful.

 

[Tincanalley]

Barney Ronay making the same point today. It’s not a sports club, any more than a police force is a sport’s club; it’s a state-run machine. It has all the backup of a state, with the Pep ecosystem grafted on. It’s fake. I never want to see United zombified in this way. Never. PR for dictators; please use someone else’s club as host organism. It’s impossible to despise City. It’s like despising a uniform.

 

[Mockney]

Barney Ronay making the same point today. It’s not a sports club, any more than a police force is a sport; it’s a state-run machine. It has all the backup of a state, with the Peo ecosystem grafted on. It’s fake. I never want to see United zombified in this way. Never. PR for dictators at someone else’s host organism. It’s impossible to despise City. It’s like despising a uniform.

Which isn’t helped by the fact that Pep & his backroom team being brought over to lead this charge only projects the feeling that they’ve bought another clubs culture (in this case Barca’s) in the same way that they took the Poznan as their own. A short cut to culture and status that doesn’t feel like theirs. There’s no “Man City way” as yet. It’s Pep’s way, which was honed at Barca, where his success was achieved with their own academy players.

Haaland should be a boon in this respect as the son of an actual former player, who does feel like something tangibly “City”. I’m surprised they haven’t leaned into Foden a lot more either.

 

[Smores]

We earned the money we spent by being successful.

Shame we'll soon no longer be able to claim such a thing. Just like the rest of them and worse than Liverpool, Arsenal.

 

[FrankFoot]

The fact that they can't fill their own stadium it's astonishing... after all the success they are having.

I guess winning isn't enough to attract people.

I didn't use to believe this, but now i think it's true that City might feels souless and way too perfect and fabricated to attract supporters.

 

[Frosty]

We earned the money we spent by being successful.

We also spent less in the 90s than Tottenham. Not sure you can dismiss investment in the youth team as an unearned gift.

 

[Gazza]

I’ve admired Pep as neutral for years seeing as Arsenal were a complete non-entity in the league. Now his genius is adversely affecting my life, I have to say - he does leave me slightly cold.

When Arsenal recently played United I truly felt something. It reminded of why I love football. And it wasn’t just because of the result, there was something intangible between the teams that simply isn’t there with City. It’s almost like the difference between a 1v1 game and competing against a computer.

I think they play amazing football, but it’s oddly soulless. I never got that feeling with his Barcelona team. People talk about the players he inherited, but he also personally brought the likes of Busquets through with him from Barca B. There was something beautifully organic about that team. Whereas this City side is a ruthlessly efficient machine.

That's an interesting way of articulating it. I think you're right.

 

[Gazza]

It's possible to credit Pep for being the all-time great coach that he is while also dismissing City as an artificial, financially doped Frankenstein's Monster who'd be nothing without Pep and Abu Dhabi's bottomless resources.

This is where I'm at. Pep is a genius. City have an incredible team. I'm weirdly not envious of City despite that.

 

[caid]

I dont think theres much sporting achievement involved with them.
Theres certainly an element of competence with how they've built the team but when spending 50m on Bravo or Mangala or whoever isn't even a speedbump i don't know if they have actually been that effective. They just have enough money that mistakes only hurt them till the next transfer window opens.
The coach wasn't backed as he was learning the game, wasn't an up and coming coach given a chance to prove himself. He was widely regarded as the best manager in the world. Didn't really develop any of the players in the squad. Foden looks on the outskirts of the team and the only one worth mentioning. Didn't scout players from some obscure lower level, they were all well established and ready to be dropped into any team in the world. They've just spent money on well established, world class players who were available. If they didn't work out then buy more.
They've reached a point where any team they face its assumed they'll win, probably comfortably and all but the best in the world dont stand a hope in hell. Theres no real rival you fancy to beat them. Liverpool's best side in 40 years with ungoldy luck with injuries, referee's and form just about keep up (but lose). Arsenal can be 5+ points ahead for 30 games of a season and everyone assumes a City side going through the motions most of the season will overtake them (they do)

The only sporting obstacle they really needed to overcome is their own underperformance. They shouldn't be getting beat by Lyon or Tottenham or even Real last season.
Their success is built on money made independent of the club. Money is the only notable thing about them. Its the explanation for anything valuable associated with the club.
How did they attract Guardiola? Money. How did they build such a strong side? Money. What will it take to catch up and compete with them? Money
You cant develop 20 world class youth players in every position on the pitch all ideally suited to one specific way of playing. You cant do it on a budget with scouting or you get picked apart like Lyon with Bernardo Silva and MBappe. Or if your at a more established club then you get sacked developing these guys before they explode

 

[Fortitude]

I understand the sentiment but I think it is really just because they are so good. So good that it seems impossible to beat them... if we lose to them it mostly makes me shrug as long as we give it a go.

However, I can't really show disdain or anything similar. Since the money came in and especially since Pep they have been almost unerringly smart in all their moves. What they have done is fantastic really, and not as easy as people make out at all.

Unless other teams cheat, how can we possibly know that?

 

[surf]

Yes in a way because they are just too good. It seems that they can win 10 league games in a row any time they put their minds to it. And their goal differences over the last few seasons are astonishing by historical PL standards.

 

[Libero_of_Yore]

I dont think theres much sporting achievement involved with them.
Theres certainly an element of competence with how they've built the team but when spending 50m on Bravo or Mangala or whoever isn't even a speedbump i don't know if they have actually been that effective. They just have enough money that mistakes only hurt them till the next transfer window opens.
The coach wasn't backed as he was learning the game, wasn't an up and coming coach given a chance to prove himself. He was widely regarded as the best manager in the world. Didn't really develop any of the players in the squad. Foden looks on the outskirts of the team and the only one worth mentioning. Didn't scout players from some obscure lower level, they were all well established and ready to be dropped into any team in the world. They've just spent money on well established, world class players who were available. If they didn't work out then buy more.
They've reached a point where any team they face its assumed they'll win, probably comfortably and all but the best in the world dont stand a hope in hell. Theres no real rival you fancy to beat them. Liverpool's best side in 40 years with ungoldy luck with injuries, referee's and form just about keep up (but lose). Arsenal can be 5+ points ahead for 30 games of a season and everyone assumes a City side going through the motions most of the season will overtake them (they do)

The only sporting obstacle they really needed to overcome is their own underperformance. They shouldn't be getting beat by Lyon or Tottenham or even Real last season.
Their success is built on money made independent of the club. Money is the only notable thing about them. Its the explanation for anything valuable associated with the club.
How did they attract Guardiola? Money. How did they build such a strong side? Money. What will it take to catch up and compete with them? Money
You cant develop 20 world class youth players in every position on the pitch all ideally suited to one specific way of playing. You cant do it on a budget with scouting or you get picked apart like Lyon with Bernardo Silva and MBappe. Or if your at a more established club then you get sacked developing these guys before they explode

How can you talk about City and put their success ALL down to money? Chelsea have just spent 600 million in 3 windows and are languishing in 11th. Man Utd have spent a BILLION and have been shit.
Face reality. Pep has elevated that club/team beyond belief.
Give credit
5 out of 6 Premier Leagues? He is running amok.

 

[SirReginald]

Right now sure. I couldn’t care less what they do or what they achieve. Particularly because of their financial irregularities and fake sponsorships. Though I am interested to see how they do going forward. A lot of their key players are getting old and Haaland will 100% move to Madrid in a couple of years.

 

[RedC]

"Pep doesn’t do adversity really. Sir Alex stuck by during our no value phase and built a new period of success he created himself by developing younger stars and adding some smart signings (VDS, Evra, Park, Vidic etc). Pep would jump to PSG or Bayern to pad his tally if that happened. "

Man City have broken the British transfer record just twice in their entire history and not once under Pep. Man United have done it six times, three times under Fergie, four if you include Bryan Robson who played for him.

Fergie broke the transfer record doing his spell at United more times than City have in their entire 100+ year history in the game. On top of that he received a load of once in a lifetime gifts from the youth ranks in the likes of Scholes, Beckham, Neville and Giggs.


Fergie, adversity? Stealing legends and the best players off big clubs like Arsenal and Spurs isn't adversity!

The first time any club came up to match United's spending power, in Chelsea, United came worse off in a head to head with Mourinho in charge.

There is absolutely no question that United spent years buying the title. There was nothing fair in that. In fact, in some folks eyes they'd call it cheating too.

Jesus Christ

 

[Dansk]

I dont think theres much sporting achievement involved with them.
Theres certainly an element of competence with how they've built the team but when spending 50m on Bravo or Mangala or whoever isn't even a speedbump i don't know if they have actually been that effective. They just have enough money that mistakes only hurt them till the next transfer window opens.
The coach wasn't backed as he was learning the game, wasn't an up and coming coach given a chance to prove himself. He was widely regarded as the best manager in the world. Didn't really develop any of the players in the squad. Foden looks on the outskirts of the team and the only one worth mentioning. Didn't scout players from some obscure lower level, they were all well established and ready to be dropped into any team in the world. They've just spent money on well established, world class players who were available. If they didn't work out then buy more.
They've reached a point where any team they face its assumed they'll win, probably comfortably and all but the best in the world dont stand a hope in hell. Theres no real rival you fancy to beat them. Liverpool's best side in 40 years with ungoldy luck with injuries, referee's and form just about keep up (but lose). Arsenal can be 5+ points ahead for 30 games of a season and everyone assumes a City side going through the motions most of the season will overtake them (they do)

The only sporting obstacle they really needed to overcome is their own underperformance. They shouldn't be getting beat by Lyon or Tottenham or even Real last season.
Their success is built on money made independent of the club. Money is the only notable thing about them. Its the explanation for anything valuable associated with the club.
How did they attract Guardiola? Money. How did they build such a strong side? Money. What will it take to catch up and compete with them? Money
You cant develop 20 world class youth players in every position on the pitch all ideally suited to one specific way of playing. You cant do it on a budget with scouting or you get picked apart like Lyon with Bernardo Silva and MBappe. Or if your at a more established club then you get sacked developing these guys before they explode

Yep. It's the sporting equivalent of buying a full stamp collection at an auction and then going to a philatelist convention to brag about the quality of your collection. No soul to it, no story, no effort and nothing that deserves any pride. Just an exchange of money for success without any of the journey or need to do things right. It's completely artificial and unimpressive. That's before even taking into account the fact that they cheated in order to get there. That entire club is just a hollow shell, a symbol of the most extreme exploitation of the sport.

 

[HookedOnAPhelan]

"Pep doesn’t do adversity really. Sir Alex stuck by during our no value phase and built a new period of success he created himself by developing younger stars and adding some smart signings (VDS, Evra, Park, Vidic etc). Pep would jump to PSG or Bayern to pad his tally if that happened. "

Man City have broken the British transfer record just twice in their entire history and not once under Pep. Man United have done it six times, three times under Fergie, four if you include Bryan Robson who played for him.

Fergie broke the transfer record doing his spell at United more times than City have in their entire 100+ year history in the game. On top of that he received a load of once in a lifetime gifts from the youth ranks in the likes of Scholes, Beckham, Neville and Giggs.


Fergie, adversity? Stealing legends and the best players off big clubs like Arsenal and Spurs isn't adversity!

The first time any club came up to match United's spending power, in Chelsea, United came worse off in a head to head with Mourinho in charge.

There is absolutely no question that United spent years buying the title. There was nothing fair in that. In fact, in some folks eyes they'd call it cheating too.

What a load of shite. I suggest you run the numbers on transfer spending in the 90’s and 00’s. We weren’t the biggest spending club before or after Roman. And Chelsea didn’t ‘match’ our spending, they vastly exceeded it. And we didn’t come worse off against Mourinho. We beat him to the title in 06/07 after a few years of rebuilding and he got sacked the following season, while we went on to retain the title and win the CL.

 

[Manchester Dan]

We earned the money we spent by being successful.

Would that be not irrelevant in a discussion between Pep & Fergie? Both achieved great things while spending lots of money provided by their respective clubs. Your view on the legitimacy of the source of that money does nothing in that particular discussion for the merits of the two individuals, no?

 

[Di Maria's angel]

"Pep doesn’t do adversity really. Sir Alex stuck by during our no value phase and built a new period of success he created himself by developing younger stars and adding some smart signings (VDS, Evra, Park, Vidic etc). Pep would jump to PSG or Bayern to pad his tally if that happened. "

Man City have broken the British transfer record just twice in their entire history and not once under Pep. Man United have done it six times, three times under Fergie, four if you include Bryan Robson who played for him.

Fergie broke the transfer record doing his spell at United more times than City have in their entire 100+ year history in the game. On top of that he received a load of once in a lifetime gifts from the youth ranks in the likes of Scholes, Beckham, Neville and Giggs.


Fergie, adversity? Stealing legends and the best players off big clubs like Arsenal and Spurs isn't adversity!

The first time any club came up to match United's spending power, in Chelsea, United came worse off in a head to head with Mourinho in charge.

There is absolutely no question that United spent years buying the title. There was nothing fair in that. In fact, in some folks eyes they'd call it cheating too.

It amazes me when I read such garbage. Like this is written by an actual human?

 

[Di Maria's angel]

Would that be not irrelevant in a discussion between Pep & Fergie? Both achieved great things while spending lots of money provided by their respective clubs. Your view on the legitimacy of the source of that money does nothing in that particular discussion for the merits of the two individuals, no?

I'd love to see Pep lose his best player, one of the greatest of all time, and replace him with an out of date Michael Owen, a terrible unknown French winger and a winger from a championship level side, and then win the league.

 

[11101]

How can you talk about City and put their success ALL down to money? Chelsea have just spent 600 million in 3 windows and are languishing in 11th. Man Utd have spent a BILLION and have been shit.
Face reality. Pep has elevated that club/team beyond belief.
Give credit
5 out of 6 Premier Leagues? He is running amok.

It's 4 in 6 actually.

Without the money they'd be nowhere, in the lower divisions most likely. They had won 2 of the previous 4 leagues before he arrived. They were already well on their way, he has benefited from another 6 years of insane spending and added the icing on an already finished cake. Its much easier when there are no consequences for missed transfers or failure. Bought a dodgy right back? Go and buy another one. No other club can do that.

Plus we now know that the money City say they spend and what they actually spend are not the same thing.

 

[caid]

How can you talk about City and put their success ALL down to money? Chelsea have just spent 600 million in 3 windows and are languishing in 11th. Man Utd have spent a BILLION and have been shit.
Face reality. Pep has elevated that club/team beyond belief.
Give credit
5 out of 6 Premier Leagues? He is running amok.

Pep isn't there out of some deep connection and affection for Manchester City.
I mean i could give them credit for being less inept than us or Chelsea but thats a low bar. I dont think Chelsea gained 600m worth of players basically. I think you could make a case for them being weaker now than when they started. Rudiger and Christensen seem better than anything they've replaced them with. Tomori looks pretty good at Milan. Enzo might be the one upgrade but Jorginho, Kovacic and Kante being 2 years younger are probably a better collection of options than anything you can put next to Enzo now. The forwards remain shit but Giroud and Abraham or even Werner would at least compete for a spot surely.
I could dig through a decades worth of finances on wages, agent fees and transfer spending to figure out who spent most and how much of that spending remains at the club, which would be long winded and of little value while City's finances are being questioned or i could just look at the squads and judge which is stronger, which might be difficult ordinarily but really isn't in this case.
They're the best team by a wide margin and have put that squad together by spending big transfer fees. 1 player developed by their academy and i dont think theres any bargains in there.

 

[Care_de_Bobo]

Would that be not irrelevant in a discussion between Pep & Fergie? Both achieved great things while spending lots of money provided by their respective clubs. Your view on the legitimacy of the source of that money does nothing in that particular discussion for the merits of the two individuals, no?

You do realise that Ferguson won the Scottish league and the Cup Winners Cup with Aberdeen right? They beat Bayern Munich in the quarters and Real Madrid in the final (without the most expensive squad ever assembled).

Nothing Pep has done even comes close to matching that achievement and the odds of him ever taking on such a challenge are pretty slim.

 

[erikcred]

I’ve admired Pep as neutral for years seeing as Arsenal were a complete non-entity in the league. Now his genius is adversely affecting my life, I have to say - he does leave me slightly cold.

When Arsenal recently played United I truly felt something. It reminded of why I love football. And it wasn’t just because of the result, there was something intangible between the teams that simply isn’t there with City. It’s almost like the difference between a 1v1 game and competing against a computer.

I think they play amazing football, but it’s oddly soulless. I never got that feeling with his Barcelona team. People talk about the players he inherited, but he also personally brought the likes of Busquets through with him from Barca B. There was something beautifully organic about that team. Whereas this City side is a ruthlessly efficient machine.

Only one reason -- Messi. Without him, what they'd have is that Spain team of 2008-2012. Usually boring to watch.

 

[Guy Incognito]

The one thing I have noticed is whenever they win a trophy, the story isn't about them and that upsets Pep.

They won a domestic treble and yet the media talked about Liverpool.

Win the title this season? All the focus will be on Arsenal.

There isn't anything new or interesting to say about City unless they win the CL. And yet it won't be as romanticised as say when a lesser resourced team wins the trophy.

They are a good side but I wonder if the league are concerned about the brand especially if they are found guilty of FFP. Makes a mockery about the whole thing.

 

[Daydreamer]

How can you talk about City and put their success ALL down to money? Chelsea have just spent 600 million in 3 windows and are languishing in 11th. Man Utd have spent a BILLION and have been shit.
Face reality. Pep has elevated that club/team beyond belief.
Give credit
5 out of 6 Premier Leagues? He is running amok.

Yeah, that’s where I’m at. I’m not doubting Pep’s genius. And City’s executive team are amazing at executing. That shouldn’t be rare as it’s literally their job, but it is.

The money complicates things. There’s the unearned aspect as it’s source is completely external. And there is the alleged fraudulent element as well. However, there are plenty of examples of spending huge sums of money not working out. You can’t just dismiss comparisons to post-SAF United or post-Ambramovic Chelsea as a low bar. They are a perfect illustration that money alone isn’t enough.

What I love about sport is that it’s an balanced of culture, art and science through competition. I think City’s dominance works against that.

I think it’s unfair to say that City have no history. They clearly do. But I think their current club culture has nothing to do with their history. They’ve airdropped the best executives / coaches / players in and that could have happened to any club with the same results.

And their approach to football is less like an art form to be appreciated and more like a technical problem to be solved. Pep’s Barca team really felt like the highest expression of that specific club’s approach to football. Even City’s title last year felt like Pep solving the problem of not having a top class 9 (though Arsenal have managed to challenge with one of his rotation options up front). But adding Haaland to a team that create that number of chances feels as close to a cheat code as you can get.

As a result, I think this diminishes the competition element of what makes sport so enticing.

I admit there is a huge amount of bias in an Arsenal fan selecting this season as the tipping point. But there is something about the signing of Haaland that just takes it a step too far for me.

 

[Dr. StrangeHate]

Yeah, that’s where I’m at. I’m not doubting Pep’s genius. And City’s executive team are amazing at executing. That shouldn’t be rare as it’s literally their job, but it is.

The money complicates things. There’s the unearned aspect as it’s source is completely external. And there is the alleged fraudulent element as well. However, there are plenty of examples of spending huge sums of money not working out. You can’t just dismiss comparisons to post-SAF United or post-Ambramovic Chelsea as a low bar. They are a perfect illustration that money alone isn’t enough.

What I love about sport is that it’s an balanced of culture, art and science through competition. I think City’s dominance works against that.

I think it’s unfair to say that City have no history. They clearly do. But I think their current club culture has nothing to do with their history. They’ve airdropped the best executives / coaches / players in and that could have happened to any club with the same results.

And their approach to football is less like an art form to be appreciated and more like a technical problem to be solved. Pep’s Barca team really felt like the highest expression of that specific clubs approach to football. Even City’s title last year felt like Pep solving the problem of not having a top class 9 (though Arsenal have managed to challenge with one of his rotation options up front). But adding Haaland to a team that create that number of chances feels as close to a cheat code as you can get.

As a result, I think this diminishes the competition element of what makes sport so enticing.

I admit there is a huge amount of bias in an Arsenal fan selecting this season as the tipping point. But there is something about the signing of Haaland that just takes it a step too far for me.

Newcastle went from being relegation candidates to top 4 in one season after being state owned. Money is the main reason for the turn in fortunes. Spending money on the team is just one aspect. What can be done in the background; coaching staff, facilities, academy, medical team, etc. doesn't get talked about much. City have spent billions just on that stuff. They bought Pep's brother a club to keep him on board, all these things matter, not just the figures that everyone can see.

 

[Bilbo]

Yep. It's the sporting equivalent of buying a full stamp collection at an auction and then going to a philatelist convention to brag about the quality of your collection. No soul to it, no story, no effort and nothing that deserves any pride. Just an exchange of money for success without any of the journey or need to do things right. It's completely artificial and unimpressive. That's before even taking into account the fact that they cheated in order to get there. That entire club is just a hollow shell, a symbol of the most extreme exploitation of the sport.

A very good analogy

 

[Orion.]

How can you talk about City and put their success ALL down to money? Chelsea have just spent 600 million in 3 windows and are languishing in 11th. Man Utd have spent a BILLION and have been shit.
Face reality. Pep has elevated that club/team beyond belief.
Give credit
5 out of 6 Premier Leagues? He is running amok.

Other clubs are overpaying for mediocrity because in an era of relative scarcity of talent, they’ve stockpiled a disproportionate amount of it.

Grealish, Mahrez and Bernardo would be the main creator at any of the other top 6 clubs, but they’re content instead to be De Bruyne’s bitches. Alvarez starts for every other club, while Dias was sat on the bench for the first half of the season and Laporte is used sparingly. They should win everything and even more than they have under Guardiola.

 

[RedRocket9908]

How can you talk about City and put their success ALL down to money? Chelsea have just spent 600 million in 3 windows and are languishing in 11th. Man Utd have spent a BILLION and have been shit.
Face reality. Pep has elevated that club/team beyond belief.
Give credit
5 out of 6 Premier Leagues? He is running amok.

You cant compare Pep spending £1.2b on his own with 5 different managers all with different ideas and playing styles spending a combined £1b at Man Utd on players as 1 manager spending that on players for his own system is more effective than 5 managers spending tgat money for 5 different systems., Pep has a system he stole from the people that managed him and has spent £1.2b buying a top quality player or 2 for every position in it.

 

[Libero_of_Yore]

Other clubs are overpaying for mediocrity because in an era of relative scarcity of talent, they’ve stockpiled a disproportionate amount of it.

Grealish, Mahrez and Bernardo would be the main creator at any of the other top 6 clubs, but they’re content instead to be De Bruyne’s bitches. Alvarez starts for every other club, while Dias was sat on the bench for the first half of the season and Laporte is used sparingly. They should win everything and even more than they have under Guardiola.

I'm not sure Arteta would start Alvarez over Jesus tbh.

 

[Solius]

Would that be not irrelevant in a discussion between Pep & Fergie? Both achieved great things while spending lots of money provided by their respective clubs. Your view on the legitimacy of the source of that money does nothing in that particular discussion for the merits of the two individuals, no?

Give Pep players the quality of Tom Cleverley & Anderson and see if he wins the league with that midfield. Fergie proved he could do it with and without money.

 

[Daydreamer]

You cant compare Pep spending £1.2b on his own with 5 different managers all with different ideas and playing styles spending a combined £1b at Man Utd on players as 1 manager spending that on players for his own system is more effective than 5 managers spending tgat money for 5 different systems., Pep has a system he stole from the people that managed him and has spent £1.2b buying a top quality player or 2 for every position in it.

The obvious question to ask would be, why was Pep was given the resources that United spread across five Managers? It’s not out of blind loyalty or the kindness of Sheik Mansour’s heart.

As for stealing a management system, I’m not really sure what that means, but if it that simple, you wonder why he’s the only one to think of it.

City also leave me cold, but that’s not because Pep isn’t a brilliant coach. In part, it’s because of that.

 

[Maluco]

Any comparison is useless because of the multi millions that City have spent behind the seasons, plus the fact that their numbers can’t be trusted. He has vastly more resources behind him than Ferguson ever had, and the iceberg goes a lot deeper than what is presented.

It is success based on cheating to an unprecedented degree. It’s just not impressive.

 

[caid]

The obvious question to ask would be, why was Pep was given the resources that United spread across five Managers? It’s not out of blind loyalty or the kindness of Sheik Mansour’s heart.

As for stealing a management system, I’m not really sure what that means, but if it that simple, you wonder why he’s the only one to think of it.

City also leave me cold, but that’s not because Pep isn’t a brilliant coach. In part, it’s because of that.

The answer is obvious and Pep is clearly an excellent coach but ...
I feel like that was obvious when he was at Bayern, there wasn't much risk involved. Maybe you could give their executives credit for getting him in and selling the club to him? But largely it didn't take a genius to work out. It didn't take a genius to back SAF either, i remember sometimes people complimenting us for sticking with him so long and it always seemed hilarious. Easiest decision in world.
I think we picked managers amongst what was available, which was often slim pickings and Woodword would have put a few candidates off. The only one I'd really trust to throw money at was Mourinho and you kind of have to accept thats going to blow up after 2 years. We definitely helped blow it up mind you. Our structure was outdated and over reliant on Ferguson and Gill and if it wasn't for massive piles of money we probably should have been relegated for our shoddy management and structure, instead we won a bunch of cups that would create a legendary period of success for 99.9% of clubs. I'm not sure we're the best example of money not giving significant advantages.
Chelsea are shockingly bad this season but I'd still be surprised if they're as bad next year. A lot of the money is going on replacing Christensen and Rudiger. Jorginho, Kovacic and Kante are all coming to the end of contracts so they needed investment there. Its a lot of value lost from the squad. 80m or whatever on lukaku was basically flushed down the toilet. So a lot of it was spent just to stand still. Or try to, most of their signings look dumb and a waste of money. Which is actually an obstacle to them as they cant just turn around and immediately replace their Bravo's and Dimechelis type signings (I assume?)

I'd be annoyed at City too as an Arsenal supporter and i wouldn't dismiss it as only sour grapes.
In terms of sporting achievement and a story your just more interesting. More replicateable for ordinary clubs. Backing an unproven coach who probably needs a couple of seasons to learn the ropes. Developing Saka and building a spine with Odegaard and Saliba being a really good start. Lots of younger players bought for cheap fees and developed over a couple of seasons. Clever signings bringing in experience in Jesus and Zinchenko. You kind of did everything right. You screwed up by not having another half dozen world class players to drop into the squad to cover for injuries and fatigue. Maybe you wont get picked apart at the end of the season and you have a chance to hit the jackpot with a few more signings.

 

[Bearded One]

The answer is obvious and Pep is clearly an excellent coach but ...
I feel like that was obvious when he was at Bayern, there wasn't much risk involved. Maybe you could give their executives credit for getting him in and selling the club to him? But largely it didn't take a genius to work out. It didn't take a genius to back SAF either, i remember sometimes people complimenting us for sticking with him so long and it always seemed hilarious. Easiest decision in world.
I think we picked managers amongst what was available, which was often slim pickings and Woodword would have put a few candidates off. The only one I'd really trust to throw money at was Mourinho and you kind of have to accept thats going to blow up after 2 years. We definitely helped blow it up mind you. Our structure was outdated and over reliant on Ferguson and Gill and if it wasn't for massive piles of money we probably should have been relegated for our shoddy management and structure, instead we won a bunch of cups that would create a legendary period of success for 99.9% of clubs. I'm not sure we're the best example of money not giving significant advantages.
Chelsea are shockingly bad this season but I'd still be surprised if they're as bad next year. A lot of the money is going on replacing Christensen and Rudiger. Jorginho, Kovacic and Kante are all coming to the end of contracts so they needed investment there. Its a lot of value lost from the squad. 80m or whatever on lukaku was basically flushed down the toilet. So a lot of it was spent just to stand still. Or try to, most of their signings look dumb and a waste of money. Which is actually an obstacle to them as they cant just turn around and immediately replace their Bravo's and Dimechelis type signings (I assume?)

I'd be annoyed at City too as an Arsenal supporter and i wouldn't dismiss it as only sour grapes.
In terms of sporting achievement and a story your just more interesting. More replicateable for ordinary clubs. Backing an unproven coach who probably needs a couple of seasons to learn the ropes. Developing Saka and building a spine with Odegaard and Saliba being a really good start. Lots of younger players bought for cheap fees and developed over a couple of seasons. Clever signings bringing in experience in Jesus and Zinchenko. You kind of did everything right. You screwed up by not having another half dozen world class players to drop into the squad to cover for injuries and fatigue. Maybe you wont get picked apart at the end of the season and you have a chance to hit the jackpot with a few more signings.

I think you’re letting Chelsea off the hook a bit too much here. Apart from their history with Mourinho sometimes spending thrice more than the closest rival, record sums were spent on Morata then Lukaku in quick succession then Aubameyang came in shortly too. Lampard’s spell was a spending spree too. Even the current management’s spending cannot all be reduced to replacing the old guard as there were lots of luxurious signings including Cucurella who was purchased on top of having Chillwell (one of the best fullbacks in the league imo) and considering that they beat City to that signing (City themselves needing to replace Mendy) having also beat them to signing Jorginho in the recent past. City have been bad boys themselves too but Chelsea have not been the example of good behavior either.

99.9% of managers do not deliberately “do adversity” but make do with the best alternative available just like every other human being. When you look at Pep, he was given a big opportunity from when he was young (similar to how many young managers get opportunities at big clubs today), cashed in on it and never looked back. Apart from results, Pep is one manger that tries to push the horizons in terms of knowledge of the beautiful game and so even when he underwhelmed in UCL at Bayern, the higher-ups were willing to have him continue. Perhaps one of the strongest proofs for me of Pep’s genius is what I see the likes of Arteta and Kompany producing today, having massively gleaned from Pep’s “book of ideas.” Even the GOAT (imo) Sir Alex Ferguson would agree with me on this I’m sure.

 

[johnnyteutonic]

Of course I understand why you want to believe that. It must be painful to see your own club under-performing for 10 years whilst the club down the road spends less than you and wins trophy after trophy after trophy.

But what actual evidence do you have for your allegation? I don't mean rumours you heard in the pub from other bitter mates. Actual evidence?

I'll put aside the fact that the rules you allege we have broken, are bent in the first place. Rules that ignore clubs like yours bring saddled with enormous debts, whilst trying to limit or punish clubs like City simply trying to invest and spend like yours has done for decades. United win title after title whilst spending more than anyone else and buying up the best players season after season. Now another club is in a dominant position and you cannot stomach it.

I'll file your post under bitter and deluded.

Actually we were the 9th highest net spenders from the start of the Premier League until the '01 season:

https://www.transfermarkt.com/premi...&nat=&pos=&altersklasse=&w_s=&leihe=&intern=0

Even from next period of Fergie's reign from '01 until '13, we were the 4th highest net spenders:

https://www.transfermarkt.com/premi...&nat=&pos=&altersklasse=&w_s=&leihe=&intern=0

And to date, despite our vast spending in the past decade, we are still behind both you and Chelsea in gross spend by roughly 340 millon pounds, and third in average amount spent per season overall from the start of the EPL until now, and 2nd in net spend:

https://www.transferleague.co.uk/homepage/front-page/premier-league-table-1992-to-date-2

So your statement about United winning 'title after title whilst spending more than anyone else' is simply not correct.
I am not denying that we did spend heavily in the Fergie era like getting Rio, Veron and Keane, etc, but unlike City and Chelsea, we actually relied quite a bit on developing young players.

 

[johnnyteutonic]

"Pep doesn’t do adversity really. Sir Alex stuck by during our no value ph
ase and built a new period of success he created himself by developing younger stars and adding some smart signings (VDS, Evra, Park, Vidic etc). Pep would jump to PSG or Bayern to pad his tally if that happened. "

Man City have broken the British transfer record just twice in their entire history and not once under Pep. Man United have done it six times, three times under Fergie, four if you include Bryan Robson who played for him.

Fergie broke the transfer record doing his spell at United more times than City have in their entire 100+ year history in the game. On top of that he received a load of once in a lifetime gifts from the youth ranks in the likes of Scholes, Beckham, Neville and Giggs.


Fergie, adversity? Stealing legends and the best players off big clubs like Arsenal and Spurs isn't adversity!

The first time any club came up to match United's spending power, in Chelsea, United came worse off in a head to head with Mourinho in charge.

There is absolutely no question that United spent years buying the title. There was nothing fair in that. In fact, in some folks eyes they'd call it cheating too.

Sorry but this is just outrageous cherry-picking. It's absolutely laughable that I can't believe you've even bothered with this line of argument.

You're completely taking out of context overall net spend throughout the duration of our successful teams (ironically City supporters' favourite defence over the last few years!).
Look at United's net spend from the start of Fergie's reign (including the '80s!) until the '01 season:

https://www.transfermarkt.com/premi...&nat=&pos=&altersklasse=&w_s=&leihe=&intern=0

We were the 9th highest net spenders!

And yes, during the '00s until Fergie retired, we *did spend quite a lot*, ranking 4th overall behind Liverpool, your lot and Chelsea:

https://www.transfermarkt.com/premi...&nat=&pos=&altersklasse=&w_s=&leihe=&intern=0

So I wonder what was the biggest factor in that era which involved United spending a lot more?

Chelsea more than *tripled* the previous highest transfer spend per season under Abramovich!
That's what changed the game. So that part of your narrative is correct but not in the manner in which you're saying.
You're pitching this like in the '90s we outrageously outspent our opposition and equating that to what Chelsea and City did when in fact, we achieved that success through a mixture of youth development, shrewd purchases and a world-class manager.

And as someone else pointed out, we *earnt the money ourselves*. We didn't win the lottery unlike some other clubs, it was earnt through our own success.
If you cannot see the difference there, then god help you.

And I'm not denying that we were a rich club in the '80s and '90s, but compared to the egregious spending displayed by Chelsea and City, it was far tamer.

As for buying top players off other teams?
Yes, that's what top clubs do. Madrid, Bayern, Barca all do this. That's nothing new.
I understand you're replying to this in that this idea that United were some underdogs, and for sure we absolutely weren't but the spin you're using is out of control.
As for youth development being 'lifetime gifts', that's not by luck mate - that's by design as Fergie intentionally sought out the best prospects he could get.

But nice try re-writing history.

 

[bringbackbebe]

They've doped, but that is not the sole reason for their success. City's success is purely down to Pep. They'd be 25 points a year worse off without him, and there won't be this cold consistency. He's the SAF of the modern era and they will be untouchable till he sticks around.

Spending money alone won't get clubs anywhere. Just look at Chelsea this year, or United over the last decade. They can have 20 Haalands and De Bruynes in their team and it wont matter. Don't take the credit out of Pep people.

 

[SER19]

They've doped, but that is not the sole reason for their success. City's success is purely down to Pep. They'd be 25 points a year worse off without him, and there won't be this cold consistency. He's the SAF of the modern era and they will be untouchable till he sticks around.

Spending money alone won't get clubs anywhere. Just look at Chelsea this year, or United over the last decade. They can have 20 Haalands and De Bruynes in their team and it wont matter. Don't take the credit out of Pep people.

In city's case, not spending it as they have, means not only would they not be anywhere but likes of guardiola would be nowhere near them. Without financial cheating, city have zero success. Every other point about city needs to be a distant second