The media would have us believe he was a total failure at Bayern though...
Manchester City under Pep Guardiola | Pep on City v Liverpool ref: "He likes to be special"
- Thread starter Adisa
- Start date
The media would have us believe he was a total failure at Bayern though...
I don't think Guardiola will ever go back to previously coached by him team. He already made it clear that he will never be again coach of Barcelona. I am pretty sure he will answer the same about Bayern.
The majority of City's commercial revenue - way more than that £58 million Spurs pull in - comes from non-Abu Dhabi/UAE companies these days mate. Your point would've been relevant back in 2011 but it's less so now. City have signed loads of partnerships with companies across the globe over the past few years. From football sticker album partners in Luxembourg to energy drink partners in Thailand to car battery partners in Indonesia. Not to mention deals with the likes of Nissan, SAP, CitiBank, Nexen Tyre (who sponsor the bridge linking the training ground to the stadium).
Yeah, I know. It's just another shit game by Bayern right now, and I can't help but remember how we didn't embarrass ourselves against bottom of the table teams under Pep.
I'd like to see a breakdown of this "way more than £58m". They have lost of small value partnerships with clubs paying legitimate market value but all the large deals are with companies related to the owner.
The simple way to compare commercial attractiveness is to look at kit deals which can't really be fudged...
United - £75m
Chelsea - £60m
Arsenal - £30m
Liverpool - £30m
City - £12m
Spurs - £10m
That's where City would be without ownership sponsorship.
and in Luxembourg to boot. I bet they are all the few 100 thousand ones type deals we have a hundred of.Are those figures not indicative of how many shirts will be sold? Which is not a direct correlation of 'commercial attractiveness'?
As you seem particularly interested in City's finances, would you say Abu Dhabi's interest in Manchester City is as a 'play-thing' or as a long-term business venture?
City's kit deal was last negotiated back in 2012. That was 5 years ago and kit deals have increased exponentially since, as evidenced by the top 4 teams on that list - who have all signed new deals far more recently than City - compared to what they were earning previously. We're currently 8 years into a 10-year deal with Nike (the first 3 years from 2009 were at £6 million a year with Nike-owned Umbro which doubled to £12 million a year when we switched to Nike) so if we're not negotiating a new deal with potential suitors now, we will be very soon and whoever it's with I'd expect it to net us in the region of £30m-£40m a year. If I'm not mistaken, Spurs will shortly be getting something similar to that figure from Nike so that £10m a year will soon be as outdated as our £12m a year.
No doubt they are but City have signed dozens of such deals. However, we have larger deals with companies not related to our owner as well. On the same day United were announcing a partnership with your noodle partner Nissin, City were announcing a sponsorship deal with Nissan
It's not just to do with shirt sales, no. It's generally a pretty good indicator of commercial saleability.
I agree that it's out of date. My overriding point however is that City are similar to Spurs in their commercial attractiveness. Both City and Spurs are likely to at least double their kit deal, but will still be looking at best to match the likes of Arsenal's kit deal (which will be outdated by that point).
That's a fair comment but I think you're under-estimating the quality of the people that work on City's commercial deals. Ferran Soriano and Tom Glick do a very good job IMO but I feel Arsenal, who I fully appreciate are a bigger club in terms of fanbase, often under-sell themselves. The likes of Gazidis don't do anywhere near enough to earn his £2 million a year salary. Then again, Gazidis is a City fan so maybe he doesn't want to see Arsenal succeed ahead of us!
If you can't see that City have a profile now that makes them commercially attractive I can't help you.
But consider this, 65% of City's sponsorships come from completely independent companies in no way related to the owners.
City are now big news and that is a fact.
I suspe
Undoubtedly mate, it was over inflated at the time but given how other clubs deals compare atm I think our deal has fallen in line. Granted we don't have the history of you guys/ Liverpool etc.. but we were CL semi finalists last season.
Agree on the last part 100%.
The etihad deal was over priced when it was made but now I think it's about average. Alot of outside dealings of our club are certainly friends scratching each Sheikh's back. But what club doesn't have that going on. It's not just city, psg and Chelsea doing that, of course wealthy owners are going to use contacts etc.. to bring in funds.
Catalan media is pathetic.
http://sportwitness.co.uk/from-spai...-himself-to-poor-football-like-mourinho-does/
http://sportwitness.co.uk/from-spai...-himself-to-poor-football-like-mourinho-does/
He's been holding us to ransom for money for a long time now. Should let him go. It's a bad example to the other youth players.
yep, it will happen again. Next season.
I think it's mainly the BM loons that believe that Mansour's interest in City is a business venture. I think even many of these have heard the lie so much that they've convinced themselves it's true. Many don't want to believe that there club is being run like a spotty 15 year old playing Football Manager on cheat mode.
The Blues i work with were ecstatic at the time of the takeover. They believed that after the huge amounts of spending they were going to have a period of dominance. This would give them the profile to start bringing in big commercial income from organizations unconnected to the sheikh. After a few years they would employ a top manager, then start bringing talent from the academy through. They were then going to be self sufficient, making 1 or 2 marquee signings each season.
Alot of these guys are now pretty pissed off tbh. There is going to be another massive outlay on players in the Summer. The only player who's had any kind of run since being promoted from the reserves now look's like he's about to be binned off.
Mansour's outlay will be over the £2 Billion mark by the start of next season. You don't need to be a dragon to realize this business model hasn't worked.
He's back. 2 posts in April both about Pep/City. The ultimate United fan is back. Pity your not a city fan, you'd fit right in on Blue Moon.
They're possibly a bit behind schedule on the youth promotion front but their youth development is by all accounts very well built, they've got one of the best managers in the world, they qualified for the CL semi finals last season and they've been arguably the most successful team domestically this decade (depending on how much stock you put in the cups). So if they're genuinely pretty pissed off now then they're fecking stupid.
Think the biggest problem he faced was the players that were there needed a bigger overhaul than even pep thought, the defence and gk situation has got worse and they for me could still do with CM players, cant think of any the defence that would be missed if they were injured for a long period or sold, forward players are well stocked and have a lot of quality, Sane looks like hes going to be an excellent player imo
I think most fans will put the emphasis on trophies. It's all well being consistent but there are no trophies handed out for this, just ask Arsenal. It's even worse if you are consistently underachieving.
The City fans i know were expecting they were going to replicate & refine the Utd model. They didn't have a problem with spending big at the beginning. I'd give them shit about buying the league. It didn't matter though as they wouldn't always be doing it this way. It's nearly a decade later & they are still having to outspend everyone else. This wasn't the way it was supposed to go.
I see some brilliant moments of football from them this season. But probably they need some other key players to perform it consistently.
Defense is obvious the issue. Need fix it
Defense is obvious the issue. Need fix it
We were poor last night no doubts about it, but City weren't that much better in truth. A good team could of and probably would of put us to the sword. Without Silva they look lost creatively. We talk about the deadwood we have in our squad but City have a hell of a lot of it in theirs to. Pep is really going to have to work some magic in Summer I think if he wants this City squad challenging for the league \ CL next year.
I think City did not play good at all. It was pretty surprising that Guardiola did not introduce a forward towards the middle of the second half. We were struggling to maintain the ball without Pogba and hardly looked like a threat especially in the second half. I did not follow his teams as much as I followed United of course, I am really surprised by his reluctancy to shake things up, especially in big matches. I guess the second match of semifinal against Inter and his loss in Nou camp against Real Madrid would be good examples.
I know I'm hearing this wrong right? But at 1:38 it sounds like he says: "All of them are more than 33 and they have no talent."
Maybe it's just me.
The maddening thing is that over two PL games, we barely tested that very iffy defence and GK of theirs. Frustrating and infuriating really.
I know I'm hearing this wrong right? But at 1:38 it sounds like he says: "All of them are more than 33 and they have no talent."
Maybe it's just me
I think he said they "have no talent to go up and down the pitch." I'm guessing he meant they are too old to cover such a large area for 90 mins, which is why City held back in their own way.
Ability would have been a better word to use than talent.
They need:I see some brilliant moments of football from them this season. But probably they need some other key players to perform it consistently.
Defense is obvious the issue. Need fix it
-Basically, a whole new defence;
-2 midfielders;
-a striker, considering Aguero's injury record.
Not true though with new full backs our cbs are fine. 2 midfielders is one too many with silva, Fernandinho and Gundo already there and garcia getting more game time next season.
Aguero hasn't been injured once this season and we have Jesus we don't need a striker unless pep wants to play 2 up top.
We need 4 fullbacks or 3 and promote maffeo and a mid with better legs to replace Toure.
I know I'm hearing this wrong right? But at 1:38 it sounds like he says: "All of them are more than 33 and they have no talent."
Maybe it's just me.
Yeah he indeed did I think its kind of more a case of him using the wrong word though. Basically our 4 fullbacks between them couldn't run 100m in 4 weeks. The biggest reason we couldn't create anything great last night and break down Jose's great wall was our full backs had to be restrained facing Martial, Lingard, Rashford etc.. There current ones can't do both so we couldn't create overlaps due to their lack of legs. Its been key in our inability to put alot of teams away at home this season and why we sit where we are in the table unfortunately or fortunately if you support United.
I do think that Pep last night told us clearer than ever before its the end of Zabba (whose a club legend), Kola, Sagna and Clichy (the later who I won't miss) but it was a simple statement of fact from Pep.
agree with this, 6 players contracts up this summer and only 2 the years after
Navas
Zaba
Clichy
Sanga
Yaya
Willy C
tbh I think I'd let all 6 go thought I'd be tempted to hold onto Zaba for 1 more season as I think he'd be ideal for Cups and against teams in the bottom half
Season after
Ferna1 and Kolarov, I'd try and cash in on Kolarov now tbh
So in the summer we need a Keeper, 3 full backs and a possibly a center mid and we'll probably buy a striker as I think 'nacho will be allowed to go out on loan somewhere.
Players who will be flogged IMO
Hart
Mangala
Fernando
Nolito
Nasri
Bony
Mooy
not sure what will happen with
Roberts
Ntcham
Denayer
I'm here for my post match analysis of Pep and can confirm he is still bald.
Do you really think Kompany, Otamendi and Stones are good? You need a WC class CB at least.
They will be fine, cept maybe Stones. Kompany and Otamendi if Kompany stays fit will be solid with 2 decent fullbacks imo and I don't think Pep will give up on Stones just yet (though I could be tempted.)
I mean even with terrible fullbacks we've only conceded 6 goals more than Chelsea, granted we've conceded 11 more than United and 13 or 14 than Spurs but when you consider the attacking way we play thats acceptable.
We've also only conceded 7 goals in 11 league games since the start of February when Pep decided to reign in the left back and play Navas at RB who has the energy to cover the ground.
In that time we've played Chelsea, Liverpool, yourselves, United.
In our last 12 games we've conceded 9 goals despite playing the entire top 6, all this with chopping and changing CB's because of injury. So I reckon we'll be fine.
By comparison since first of February when we started playing Navas and reigning in the other fullbacks when they play.
City played 11, conceded 7. // Goal Difference +13
Chelsea played 10, conceded 13 // GD +8
Liverpool played 11, conceded 14 // GD +4
Arsenal played 10, concede 16 // GD -3
Spurs played 11, conceded 6 // GD +18
Man United played 11 conceded 3 // +14
Those stats alone show that with fullbacks who can cover the ground our defence is not too bad in comparison to everyone bar Uniteds and much better than most suggest. Taking goal difference over the same period again only Spurs and United have bettered us. So I don't think defence is a major issue given our style of playing. Our fullbacks being unable to both attack and defend due to having peaked between 5-12 years ago is the issue. They can only do one or the other.
The issue we have is attacking fullbacks = too old to get back and players get exposed or
Defensive fullbacks = problem we had last night vs United, of unable to create the overloads to break down teams to park the bus without being caught on the counter.
Thats why I believe good fullbacks are the key to taking us up another level in both attack and defence and given his interview last night Pep pretty much said our fullbacks can only do either attack or defence but not both.
Its a myth thats been blown completely our of proportion that our CB's are poor. You put our CB's in Jose's system and they look top class. Put Bailly in our system before February with our fullbacks and he looks like Otter.
I agree that full backs are a far more pressing concern but City still need at least one centre back. Stones won't stop his dodgy passes from the back with Pep in charge and isn't a great defender anyway and Kompany has constant injury problems. That leaves Otamendi and Kolarov, one of which isn't really a centre back. If Kompany can somehow manage to play consistently it solves the problem but there's no way you can rely on that happening.
I know I'm hearing this wrong right? But at 1:38 it sounds like he says: "All of them are more than 33 and they have no talent."
Maybe it's just me.
Erm he does realise they didn't grow old overnight? He's stupid not replacing them last summer. It was clear as day whilst people were hyping City up with greatest squad ever to those that knew anything about football they had aging fullbacks.