Vincent Kompany: Man City quadruple a matter of time | Next year?

Whoops!

With the Saudi's incoming, will they ever do it? Hopefully not. Here's to many more bumps which will never not be enjoyable no matter how we're doing.
 
Chelsea could do it this season;

Super cup
League cup
FA cup
World club cup

Already 1 put of the 4 in the bag.

If we get the league and champs League/Europa, it's a sextuple.
 
duffer said:
Chelsea could do it this season;

Super cup
League cup
FA cup
World club cup

Already 1 put of the 4 in the bag.

If we get the league and champs League/Europa, it's a sextuple.
Click to expand...

Seems like you want a “duffer: Chelsea quadruple only a matter of time” thread.
 
SuperiorXI said:
Whoops!

With the Saudi's incoming, will they ever do it? Hopefully not. Here's to many more bumps which will never not be enjoyable no matter how we're doing.
Click to expand...
Depending on how much they get away with/around FFP, there's still probably at least three years before Newcastle United are strong enough to challenge all trophies regularly.

Bigger problem for City will be if Pep does leave at the end of his current contract, which is the end of next season as seems likely. He made them dominant to a level that will be hard for any successor to live up to, even with the mountains of cash they have.
 
Damien said:
Depending on how much they get away with/around FFP, there's still probably at least three years before Newcastle United are strong enough to challenge all trophies regularly.

Bigger problem for City will be if Pep does leave at the end of his current contract, which is the end of next season as seems likely. He made them dominant to a level that will be hard for any successor to live up to, even with the mountains of cash they have.
Click to expand...
Yeah they could go through a bit of a slump if they're not careful. Unfortunately they do have good football people in the positions that matter so perhaps the transition will be smooth and they'll just continue winning the absolute feckers.
 
Damien said:
Depending on how much they get away with/around FFP, there's still probably at least three years before Newcastle United are strong enough to challenge all trophies regularly.

Bigger problem for City will be if Pep does leave at the end of his current contract, which is the end of next season as seems likely. He made them dominant to a level that will be hard for any successor to live up to, even with the mountains of cash they have.
Click to expand...

David Moyes to replace him
 
Oh wow, they finally lost? :lol:

First defeat in the Caribou Rumbelows Worthington Milk Cup since about 1872 when we beat them. As long as the scouse don't win it I'm well happy.
 
Damien said:
Bigger problem for City will be if Pep does leave at the end of his current contract, which is the end of next season as seems likely. He made them dominant to a level that will be hard for any successor to live up to, even with the mountains of cash they have.
Click to expand...

His contract runs for 2 more seasons after this. I think he would prefer this to be his final season as he doesn't believe in managing the same club for long cycles. He's signed a longer extension as he won't want to go into a season with the players knowing he'll soon be leaving, as it gives them an opportunity to coast as they know a new manager will soon be coming in.
 
BlackBinBag said:
His contract runs for 2 more seasons after this. I think he would prefer this to be his final season as he doesn't believe in managing the same club for long cycles. He's signed a longer extension as he won't want to go into a season with the players knowing he'll soon be leaving, as it gives them an opportunity to coast as they know a new manager will soon be coming in.
Click to expand...
Doesn't it expire in 2023? So that would be one season after this and not two.

I can't see him leaving before the World Cup next year. I can see your logic but I doubt the players will coast regardless.
 
Damien said:
Doesn't it expire in 2023? So that would be one season after this and not two.
Click to expand...

Apologies you are right. I keep thinking this season is 20/21 rather than 21/22.

Am really surprised he's going into the season with his future in the air. I'm sure City would let him break a contract if he'd had enough before it ends.

I think he'll extend again. He will desperately want to win the CL. I can't see them doing it without a striker though. Liverpool, Chesea, Bayern & PSG are all better than last year.
 
Hard to believe the last time City lost a league cup game was when Carrick outpaced Aguero.

I cant even remember the score/scorers that night.
 
Damien said:
Depending on how much they get away with/around FFP, there's still probably at least three years before Newcastle United are strong enough to challenge all trophies regularly.

Bigger problem for City will be if Pep does leave at the end of his current contract, which is the end of next season as seems likely. He made them dominant to a level that will be hard for any successor to live up to, even with the mountains of cash they have.
Click to expand...
City has always had a knack for spending loosely. What I mean by this is that, perhaps because they have plenty money, they are not so thorough in some of their purchases and since selling clubs know this, the clubs tend to fleece them and they are indeed happy to take the hit sometimes. I know they have walked out of a few deals but they usually would buy £40m quality for £70 more often than not.
 
Bearded One said:
City has always had a knack for spending loosely. What I mean by this is that, perhaps because they have plenty money, they are not so thorough in some of their purchases and since selling clubs know this, the clubs tend to fleece them and they are indeed happy to take the hit sometimes. I know they have walked out of a few deals but they usually would buy £40m quality for £70 more often than not.
Click to expand...

Complete utter garbage that one is

Apart from Grealish we've never spent 70mil on a player unlike you lot.....
 
Sergioooo said:
Complete utter garbage that one is

Apart from Grealish we've never spent 70mil on a player unlike you lot.....
Click to expand...

Yeah, instead of buying Maguire for 80m you buy Stones, Laporte, Dias, Ake, Mangala, Otamendi combined for 290m pounds.
 
Sergioooo said:
Complete utter garbage that one is

Apart from Grealish we've never spent 70mil on a player unlike you lot.....
Click to expand...
Ahahahaha

Apart from Pogba we’ve never spent £85m on a player unlike you lot…..
 
Amar__ said:
Yeah, instead of buying Maguire for 80m you buy Stones, Laporte, Dias, Ake, Mangala, Otamendi combined for 290m pounds.
Click to expand...

None of which were £70m like the poster said.
If we're going all the way back to when City signed Mangala, personally I'd take Stones, Laporte, Dias, Ake, Mangala and Otamendi for £290m over Maguire, Bailly, Lindelof, Varane, Rojo, Blind for £225m but that might be just me looking at what each has accomplished since.

Putting it in perspective
£ per trophy since that time on CB's.
City 290m for 13 trophies = £22m per CB per trophy.
United £225m for 3.5 trophies (shard a charity shield.) = £64m per CB per trophy.

I know which collossal amount I'd rather have spunked.
 
JB08 said:
Ahahahaha

Apart from Pogba we’ve never spent £85m on a player unlike you lot…..
Click to expand...

Its exactly like us lot, maybe counting to 1 is tough for you.

So one player for United for £85m+, how many players over 85m have City purchased? Thats right 1.
1 each, now lets talk about £70m plus... Grealish vs Sancho, Pogba, Maguire...

If you are going to pick a number to make a silly point, pick one that suits your argument like I did.
Your £85m argument (1 each)
My £70m argument ( 3 v 1 for United)

If you had said £86m you'd at least not have made yourself look so silly.
 
padr81 said:
None of which were £70m like the poster said.
If we're going all the way back to when City signed Mangala, personally I'd take Stones, Laporte, Dias, Ake, Mangala and Otamendi for £290m over Maguire, Bailly, Lindelof, Varane, Rojo, Blind for £225m but that might be just me looking at what each has accomplished since.

Putting it in perspective
£ per trophy since that time on CB's.
City 290m for 13 trophies = £22m per CB per trophy.
United £225m for 3.5 trophies (shard a charity shield.) = £64m per CB per trophy.

I know which collossal amount I'd rather have spunked.
Click to expand...
Blind wasn’t signed as a CB & Rojo was signed to play as wing back after decent displays internationally.

You’ve got a point but when Citeh fans try to justify your spend because ‘United waste money’ it just rings disingenuous. You spend loads, you win loads too. Just be happy & move on. You’ve wasted loads but gotten things right to a far better extent. We’ve spent a load on dross.
 
AFC NimbleThumb said:
Blind wasn’t signed as a CB & Rojo was signed to play as wing back after decent displays internationally.

You’ve got a point but when Citeh fans try to justify your spend because ‘United waste money’ it just rings disingenuous. You spend loads, you win loads too. Just be happy & move on. You’ve wasted loads but gotten things right to a far better extent. We’ve spent a load on dross.
Click to expand...

If you read back you'll see it was based on a discussion based on someone stating that City bought £40m players for £70m (like Sancho, watch him get a hattrick in the derby now) that another poster twisted to CB's.
A comparison is justified when someone claims City overspent and United are the closest in terms of spending.

Its hard to compare the over spending of both Manchester clubs with any other football team really, even PSG who spunk all their money on forwards.
Like it or not when comparing the spending of the two biggest costing squad in the history of football they will be used as a benchmark to measure the other because no one spends close to what they do.

I am happy by the way but what clubs would you say United and Cities relative spending should be compared with? Using one transfer to justify another is pretty much how the market works for selling clubs
 
padr81 said:
If you read back you'll see it was based on a discussion based on someone stating that City bought £40m players for £70m (like Sancho, watch him get a hattrick in the derby now) that another poster twisted to CB's.
A comparison is justified when someone claims City overspent and United are the closest in terms of spending.

Its hard to compare the over spending of both Manchester clubs with any other football team really, even PSG who spunk all their money on forwards.
Like it or not when comparing the spending of the two biggest costing squad in the history of football they will be used as a benchmark to measure the other because no one spends close to what they do.

I am happy by the way but what clubs would you say United and Cities relative spending should be compared with? Using one transfer to justify another is pretty much how the market works for selling clubs
Click to expand...
You spent more money in the 2000's than utd did. Let that sink in
 
padr81 said:
If you read back you'll see it was based on a discussion based on someone stating that City bought £40m players for £70m (like Sancho, watch him get a hattrick in the derby now) that another poster twisted to CB's.
A comparison is justified when someone claims City overspent and United are the closest in terms of spending.

Its hard to compare the over spending of both Manchester clubs with any other football team really, even PSG who spunk all their money on forwards.
Like it or not when comparing the spending of the two biggest costing squad in the history of football they will be used as a benchmark to measure the other because no one spends close to what they do.

I am happy by the way but what clubs would you say United and Cities relative spending should be compared with? Using one transfer to justify another is pretty much how the market works for selling clubs
Click to expand...
United should organically spend more than they do so quite honestly I could care less what the blue half spend because the 2 things aren’t the same.

Again, as far as City go, you’ve spent well & spent terribly. United buying Blind & Rojo means feck all in relation to that though. When United were outspending teams & dominating I don’t remember hearing fans cry how ‘Team X spends this’, it just rings as a little self conscious. I suppose I just don’t understand why when criticised you want to compare, your achievements stand alone.
 
padr81 said:
If we're going all the way back to when City signed Mangala, personally I'd take Stones, Laporte, Dias, Ake, Mangala and Otamendi for £290m over Maguire, Bailly, Lindelof, Varane, Rojo, Blind for £225m but that might be just me looking at what each has accomplished since.
Click to expand...

I would pay 150m for Maguire if I had ti choose between that and 50m for Mendy, but that's not what we were discussing anyway. You mentioned CB and I named just CBs your club threw money on.
 
padr81 said:
Its exactly like us lot, maybe counting to 1 is tough for you.

So one player for United for £85m+, how many players over 85m have City purchased? Thats right 1.
1 each, now lets talk about £70m plus... Grealish vs Sancho, Pogba, Maguire...

If you are going to pick a number to make a silly point, pick one that suits your argument like I did.
Your £85m argument (1 each)
My £70m argument ( 3 v 1 for United)

If you had said £86m you'd at least not have made yourself look so silly.
Click to expand...
Okay - let’s arbitrarily choose another figure.

£50m signings: United 9, City 10.

What a stupid fecking argument.
 
JB08 said:
Okay - let’s arbitrarily choose another figure.

£50m signings: United 9, City 10.

What a stupid fecking argument.
Click to expand...

Which was exactly my point... Except the guy who started it picked a number that didn't suit his argument and claimed City had more 85m plus players.

Just realised that guy was you and you called your own argument fecking stupid even after you got it wrong in the first place.

Literally you..
You - have more 85m players,
Me - no we don't but you can pick any number to suit said stupid argument except the one you picked. Here's an example.
You- here's another number, but this a stupid argument I used to make a stupid point, but I'm only calling it stupid now my own stupid logic has been used against me.
 
Last edited:
Amar__ said:
I would pay 150m for Maguire if I had ti choose between that and 50m for Mendy, but that's not what we were discussing anyway. You mentioned CB and I named just CBs your club threw money on.
Click to expand...

Rojo and Blind both played Cb more than any other position
 
AFC NimbleThumb said:
United should organically spend more than they do so quite honestly I could care less what the blue half spend because the 2 things aren’t the same.

Again, as far as City go, you’ve spent well & spent terribly. United buying Blind & Rojo means feck all in relation to that though. When United were outspending teams & dominating I don’t remember hearing fans cry how ‘Team X spends this’, it just rings as a little self conscious. I suppose I just don’t understand why when criticised you want to compare, your achievements stand alone.
Click to expand...

My point is the spending/success of one is dictated by the other. So Maguire only costs 85m cause vvd cost 75, vvd cost 75 cause stones cost 50, stones cost 50 cause Luiz cost 40 etc.. etc.. but when people compare a players value it will be to other players close in value.

No one will compare sancho to Dan James for example, he'll be judged vs mahrez and players who cost similar in the end. So United are generally a good benchmark to judge city signings and vice versa.

Also United fans constantly used others spending as a comparison, look at Gifford in this very thread
 
GifLord said:
You've been spending crazy for almost 14 years now while Utd only started doing it 6 years ago.
Click to expand...

Which again is nothing to do with what's being discussed.

My posts were using the timeframe put forward by the United fan who called his own argument stupid. His timeframe not mine... I don't deny for a second we've outspent you guys so this post is kind of irrelevant, a bit like you are wading in with no context.
 
GifLord said:
You've been spending crazy for almost 14 years now while Utd only started doing it 6 years ago.
Click to expand...

Partly because of the relative strength in squads at the time, partly because we had to throw money at players to persuade them to join us instead of the likes of United

United are not struggling because of failure to invest enough money in players. They are struggling because the money has been invested poorly. There is no longer a playing or club identity. There is no medium term plan to squad investment. There are relics left from every coaching regime since Ferguson, but no one person in overall charge of football, who has the knowledge & experience to do the job, who carries enough decision making power. Too many players are bought with the wrong attitude. Too many players are played based on image, past glories & price rather than who is training hardest & playing best.

A top class manager would almost certainly get more out of this group, particularly in their first year or so, but it needs a lot longer and a lot more drastic surgery to address all the problems at United
 
jontheblue said:
Partly because of the relative strength in squads at the time, partly because we had to throw money at players to persuade them to join us instead of the likes of United

United are not struggling because of failure to invest enough money in players. They are struggling because the money has been invested poorly. There is no longer a playing or club identity. There is no medium term plan to squad investment. There are relics left from every coaching regime since Ferguson, but no one person in overall charge of football, who has the knowledge & experience to do the job, who carries enough decision making power. Too many players are bought with the wrong attitude. Too many players are played based on image, past glories & price rather than who is training hardest & playing best.

A top class manager would almost certainly get more out of this group, particularly in their first year or so, but it needs a lot longer and a lot more drastic surgery to address all the problems at United
Click to expand...
And you haven't invested poorly at the beginning? For every Aguero, Kompany, Silva, De Bruyne.. There are the likes of Robinho, Santa Cruz, Negredo, Bony- member him? Jovetic, Javi Garcia, Mangala, Mendy, Ake...
I mean just look at the team Fergie left
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012–13_Manchester_United_F.C._season#Squad_statistics
The back 4 needed a complete overhaul. Yet it didn't happen. Same for midfield
It took you over 550m€ to spend to actually get to an UCL place(2007-2011) or over 700m€ to win the EPL title. How many of those record signings were actually there when you won your first title in 2012?
You have the ability to replace an expensive signing that was a dud in the next 2 or 3 transfer windows while at Utd those same shitty players keep getting chance after chance.
 
GifLord said:
And you haven't invested poorly at the beginning? For every Aguero, Kompany, Silva, De Bruyne.. There are the likes of Robinho, Santa Cruz, Negredo, Bony- member him? Jovetic, Javi Garcia, Mangala, Mendy, Ake...
I mean just look at the team Fergie left
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012–13_Manchester_United_F.C._season#Squad_statistics
The back 4 needed a complete overhaul. Yet it didn't happen. Same for midfield
It took you over 550m€ to spend to actually get to an UCL place(2007-2011) or over 700m€ to win the EPL title. How many of those record signings were actually there when you won your first title in 2012?
You have the ability to replace an expensive signing that was a dud in the next 2 or 3 transfer windows while at Utd those same shitty players keep getting chance after chance.
Click to expand...

Absolutely we wasted hundreds of millions in getting where we are on shockers, particularly under marwood and cook. Any city fan denying that is insane.
 
padr81 said:
Absolutely we wasted hundreds of millions in getting where we are on shockers, particularly under marwood and cook. Any city fan denying that is insane.
Click to expand...

Agreed. But if anyone dared suggest on here at the time that United were somehow in an even remotely similar position to us when it came to recruiting and rebuilding, they wouldn't just have been laughed at they would have been the subject of wild hysteria. If United needed to rebuild from square one, then it's damning incitement of how poorly the club has been run for years. Which was my original point.
 
jontheblue said:
Agreed. But if anyone dared suggest on here at the time that United were somehow in an even remotely similar position to us when it came to recruiting and rebuilding, they wouldn't just have been laughed at they would have been the subject of wild hysteria. If United needed to rebuild from square one, then it's damning incitement of how poorly the club has been run for years. Which was my original point.
Click to expand...

Spot on dude. Goes to show even with a warchest, it takes more to get a successful team. The real change at City was the arrival of Txiki and Soriano. Thats when our spending got much better even if it still had the occasional dud.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.