If you honestly believe that City's title wins are valued as achievements anywhere near that of real football clubs who haven't cheated their way around FFP to buy out the league, then you are the deluded one. With £3 billion invested, you should be winning it every year. As such, it is a failure when you don't.
Manchester City 17/18 discussion | "If you're here for the Champions clap your hands" (#6505)
- Thread starter simonhch
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Can you imagine if United went 35 years without winning a trophy? While the genuine reds would continue to support their club, Cranium’s cranium would explode Scanners-style long before the 35 years was up
It must be burning your insides that United spent about a quarter short of a billion since Ferguson left and still haven't won the league!
Last edited:
I can’t speak for the other poster but I could never be that jealous of what City achieve.
It would not sit at all well to see my club reliant on a sugar daddy and being used as a PR vehicle for an oppressive state.
To move away from operating within our means to a sugar daddy model of limitless spending without consequence may bring us constant success, but the success would lose all meaning. Like a cheat code on a computer game.
Honestly, I’d take a single league title every 10 years won organically through doing the hard yards than 10 in a row under a sugar daddy.
Since getting the duck of their back in 2012, a City title win these days barely evokes any strong emotion in me, like it would if Liverpool, Arsenal, Spurs or indeed Leicester win it. I mean cast your mind back to 2014. Any City fan hoping to come on here to gloat about winning the league would have been sorely disappointed. Most of the forum were proxy City fans. It was meaningless that City won the title. Like a default option. The only thing that mattered was Liverpool not winning it, because that would’ve truly meant something. You can sort of see why City as a club are desperate to stoke a rivalry. Won the league and no one gave a shit.
It’ll be similar this year. I’ve obviously already accepted City will win the league. The feeling when it happens will be nothing, as it was in 2014. At least this time I actually enjoy watching City play, particularly De Bruyne who is one of the finest players the league has seen in years. I can appreciate the talent on display in this PR experiment. That’s as far as it goes.
Last edited:
Another article by a clueless British journalist that uses buzz words that indictate alack of understanding of what Pep Guardiola is doing.
Ronald Koeman, Philip Cocu, Luis Enrique, Julen Lopetegui and Frank de Boer are in no way shape or form Cruijffians. Peter Bosz is the only name mentioned that Johan Cruijff would approve.
Any one that knows anything about Louis van Gaal knows he is not a Cruijffian. A lot of people have a wrong understanding about Juego de posicion, it is a set of rules more than a philosophy in of itself as Antonio Conte and Maurico Pochettino use elements of it.
That is not what makes Pep Guardiola special. What makes him special is his variation within his system that eventually culminated with his players automatically understanding his ideas without his instructions and they all instinctively know where to position themselves and when to attack as we saw in his last 2 seasons at Barcelona and his final season at Bayern Munchen.
Pep Guardiola is a the greatest thief of ideas. He has the philosphy of Johan Cruijff, systemised it ala van Gaal and added elements of aggression similar to Marcelo Bielsa teams whilst adapting and taking the La volpe exit to a new height that La Volpes never imagined.
At Barcelona he had the perfect players to execute it as they all grew up using positional play. It was the purest execution since the Ajax of Louis van Gaal in the 90s. The only two teams before Maurico Sarri's Napoli to completely follow the principles.
At Bayern they had a basic understanding through Louis van Gaal but he was far more horizontal. After his first year he adapted his philosphy and married it with the directness of the Germans and also learnt how to prevent the counter attacks by improving the positioning of his team after the ball is lost.
Finally in England he has learnt to deal with the second balls that Xabi Alonso warned him about to prove that his methodology is adaptable to any league. No team has ever comprehensively dominated the premier league in every single metric. He is the reason Barcelona became a super club and Bayern have never dominated the Bundesliga consistently as they did when he was the coach.
Now English football are seeing it first had. No team in the history of the top 5 leagues and in the 129 years of English football, no team has ever had a start like this. This is supposedly the most competitive league in the world and he is dominating it more than he did any of the other leagues.
Johan Cruijff is surely smiling wherever he is. It is sad because instead of learning like the German and Spanish league did with foreign coaches, English football will continue to criticise.
Last edited:
Perhaps you're right or perhaps they want his salary off the books but there's definitely something odd about the way Pep speaks about his injuries. I didn't follow his pressys as often in Germany but as far as I can recall he's never talked about one of his players in a way that could be construed as negative in the media. Effectively labeling him as injury prone which everyone knows already seems a minor point but it's not something Guardiola has done before
Martinez has a very similar profile, IMHO, to Otamendi. His aggression should fit in well in the Premiership but he does have a propensity to be overtaken by the red mist. The fact that he can play LB as well ticks the boxes Pep likes in his players
I contend this was predictable even before his arrival though, like many United fans the goalposts will continue to move to reframe the criticism at every stage but I do think there will be a lasting legacy with some young English coaches eventually trying to copy this approach. Just won't be visible in the short term
It is amazing how many counts of lies and hypocrisy you can include in one post.
Hypocrisy aside, can you prove that even 1Bn was pumped into City, let alone 3Bn.
You also can’t prove that City is a state owned entity, you just like to repeat it over and over again.
Of course you can not prove any of the above, you just expect to pull up lies and get away with it.
A corrupt state responsible for atrocities?
If anything, I am the one that should be complaining when my countrymen are investing in a country with more corruption and atrocities than any other country in history.
What a post @totaalvoetbal !!! EVERYTHING what he said !!!
Your delusional mate. City will rightfully be lauded as an exceptional and historically great premier league team by most fans of all the English teams if they wrap up the league this season. If you can't recognize that then theres a problem.
What's your take on the main differences between Michels, Cruyff and Guardiola?
Would you compare Cruyff to Ferguson? That would be interesting. Thanks.
I'm just glad my suspicions about Jonathan Wilson proved correct this time
That was a great post.
Is that £3 Billion on City or the wider CFG?
Oh, there’s definitely a problem and it lies within his cranium. He’s the biggest troll on the City threads, even resorting to condoning the racist attack on Sterling the other week. I’m surprised he keeps coming back for more because his nonsensical arguments never fail to get straight-batted right back over his head for six.
Just thank your lucky stars he doesn’t post in the Chelsea threads!
It is amazing how many counts of lies and hypocrisy you can include in one post.
Hypocrisy aside, can you prove that even 1Bn was pumped into City, let alone 3Bn.
You also can’t prove that City is a state owned entity, you just like to repeat it over and over again.
Of course you can not prove any of the above, you just expect to pull up lies and get away with it.
A corrupt state responsible for atrocities?
If anything, I am the one that should be complaining when my countrymen are investing in a country with more corruption and atrocities than any other country in history.
It’ll be 10 billion this time next week when he has yet another meltdown!
I am no expert on this but can our resident city fans show how much was indeed spent on City. Just plain figures on transfers?
Ironically (?), the most memorable PL winners for me personally as a football fan from far far away:
1. Manchester City 2012
2. Arsenal 2004 (the invincible)
3. Leicester City 2016.
4. Manchester City 2014 (memorable because of Liverpool collapse)
5. Blackburn Rovers 1995 (the first time I followed EPL)
6. Manchester United 1999
7. Manchester United 2013 (SAF last hurrah).
8. Manchester United 1997.
I value each winner equally.
1. Manchester City 2012
2. Arsenal 2004 (the invincible)
3. Leicester City 2016.
4. Manchester City 2014 (memorable because of Liverpool collapse)
5. Blackburn Rovers 1995 (the first time I followed EPL)
6. Manchester United 1999
7. Manchester United 2013 (SAF last hurrah).
8. Manchester United 1997.
I value each winner equally.
08/09 - gross £141m, net £117m
09/10 - gross £133, net £105m
10/11 - gross £164, net £131m
11/12 - gross £78m, net £26m
12/13 - gross £56m, net £16m
13/14 - gross £104m, net £94m
14/15 - gross £79m, net £51m
15/16 - gross £191m, net £130m
16/17 - gross £192m, net £160
17/18 - gross £224m, net £139
Total - gross £1.362b, net £969m
Figures from transfermarkt.
So it is around 96.9 mln quid net per year? Can we have the same stats for United?
I make it £653m net for the same period.
That's more than I thought. The acceleration over the last three years has been matched by us though. The problem we have is that the seven years before that we under-spent massively and are only now rectifying deficiencies.
They already have.
I'm not so petty as to say City's league wins don't count. Where do you stop? Were Blackburn also fake champions? And Chelsea too? You can take umbrage against the way a club rises to riches, but on-pitch achievements are what they are.
At the heart of it all, Johan Cruijff was a football romantic and he wanted players to solve solutions by themselves. He invented the position game from scratch in the 80s at Ajax and it was based off the totaalvoetbal system he played I'm at Ajax and for the Mechanical Oranje in 1974. He was a big promoter of habit football and although he had a system in terms of structure, he preferred players to try and make mistakes and he loved technical players and his football promoted them. Everything he did was about promoting attacking football, his back line consisted of Koeman, Guardiola who sometimes dropped ala Rijkaard to form a back 4, sergi and Ferrer. That was unthinkable back then and people thought he was crazy. When Barcelona played the Intercontinental Cup final against Tele Santana's (the man that invented joga bonito) legendary Sao Paulo side and lost, Johan said "if you are going to get run over, it is better to be run over by a rolls Royce". He lived by the sword and died by the sword.
Rinus Michels was far more pragmatic and was accused of being militaristic (for a Dutch person, but still relaxed compared to the Germans). In fact there is a misconception that he invented the 433/1333 system but it was actually Feyenoord under Ernst Happel that first used this system to win the European cup in 1971 then we (Ajax) followed suit then dominated Europe.
Michels used a 424 against AC Milan in 1969 and we were embarrased because they dominated our central axis and the players warned him especially Cruijff. He used a system but was very strict with the positioning not that dissimilar to van Gaal but not as militaristic. In fact, Ajax achieved it's greatest height when Stefano Kovacs took over in the 1971/1972 season and we played the highest level of football and that is when we became the greatest club football team of all time. The players had more freedom and expressed themselves a lot more culminating with us getting 93 points out of a 102, still the Eredivise record but the laissez faire approach eventually led to the team losing its discipline and the team broke apart.
Rinus Michels wasn't dogmatic about playing good football whereas Johan Cruijff wanted to play attacking football and entertain the crowd at all times because he believed it was the duty of a footballer as people paid money and wanted to scape the pressures of life.
Most people here are not old enough but in the mid 80s there was a fallout between Johan Cruijff and Rinus Michels. Michels said that the 433/343 one striker system was no longer viable and opted for the 442 on the Euros 88. Johan Cruijff said that we had only one good striker iirc and we should use Marco van Basten as the sole 9. We won the Euros but even today it is not as celebrated and noone ever talks about that Dutch team except for the Marco van Basten volley. We played a very defensive style and a lot of people feel that was the worst of the Dutch teams (1974, 1978, 1988, 1998 and 2000).
This culminated in Rinus Michels blocking Johan Cruijff from becoming the coach in the 1990 world cup that ended in a disaster and is a black mark in Dutch football when we had arguably the most talented players in our history. The players wanted Johan but Rinus Michels had other ideas. Some have cited jelousy of Michels not wanting Johan to surpass his legacy.
As for Guardiola, sometimes I get nostalgic listening to his press conferences because somethings he says word for word what Johan used to say in the same mannerisms. When Pep was coach of Barcelona, Xavi, Pique and Iniesta used to say identical things to what Ronald Koeman, Michael Laudrup and Guardiola himself used to say, word for word.
Guardiola is more 'defensive' and pragmatic as he always thinks of methods to prevent the opposition counter and has more steps to organise the team whilst still trying to attack the goal. Johan Cruijff was more about out scoring the opposition, "if they score 3, we score 5". Their systems are still very similar. Using 3rd man runs, minimal reliance on second balls, using the goalkeeper as an outfield player, gaining numerical superiorities in the midfield, overloading the opposition box, progressing the ball vertically whenever possible, although Johan's dream team was far more agressive and riskier which is why they sometimes couldn't organise themselves quick enough to prevent counter attacks, again because the players took more risks and he let them have more freedom. They both built from the back and use wide players to spread the pitch. They also don't like their central attackers being static and want them involved in the build up.
They also love having as many technical players as possible and their teams constantly played in the opposition half. Even the coaching Pep does to the players about body position when receiving the ball he learnt all of that from Johan Cruijff.
Let us not forget Louis van Gaal in this as Guardiola used the position game of van Gaal to instill Cruijffs methods.
It is difficult to compare as Johan was the one that laid the foundations and was the first rung on the ladder of the position game. Pep has reached untold heights but he has stood on the shoulders of Johan which is why he is quick to pay respect to Johan Cruijff all the time.
A big difference is that Johan Cruijff left a lot of the things like set piece training and fitness to a lot of him assistants and didn't get involved with them. Also Pep Guardiola's teams are a lot more aggressive with their pressing but this has a lot more to do with fitness and the offside rule change, although Johan wasn't a big fan of running for running sake as he believed positioning superceded running with no purpose.
It is difficult to compare Johan to Ferguson because Johan had the authority stright away because he was already an all time player, similar to the way Zidane commanded the Real locker room were Rafa Benitez failed. Ferguson was not as dogmatic and Johan was undoubtedly a superior coach and Sir Alex left the coaching to his assistants. Sir Alex was not afraid to sit deep and counter attack. They are both similar in terms of ruthlessness.
Johan Cruijff changed a whole country. Even the current model the Germans use follow a lot of his ideas. He changed the way Spanish football played. Before Johan Cruijff, Spanish football was the most aggressive and dangerous football to the extent that Maradona said that the football in Spain will go nowhere if they carried on with la Furia Roja philosphy and dangerous play. Before Johan Cruijff a player like Xavi Hernandez, Messi and Iniesta would never have made it in Spanish football. That is his greatest legacy.
All the ideas we see today, the position game, sweeper keepers and keepers being involved in outfield training, the inverted wingers, fake #9s and not having a striker just staying in the opposition box, using small technical players in numbers, not having a fixed midfild and rotations, defending from the front and a lot more were pioneered by Johan Cruijff be it as a player and as a coach. Using Rondos as a training method for improving technique and one touch football even though it was invented by Laureano Ruiz. The variations that a lot of coaches use today especially using boxes of 5 v 4 or 5 v 3 are all off shoots of Johan's training.
Last edited:
Don’t be so soft. My comment recognises that over the last 20 years there has been no greater side than United, and over that time they never won 18 on the bounce, so at the very least what City have done this season is special.
For last five years I make the net figures: City £574m and Utd £566m.
A more interesting discussion than endlessly talking about money spent or whether Jose/Pep inherited the better squad...blah blah blah, might be where the clubs go from here. From a City perspective the age profile has come down massively, we don't have many positions to replace (Yaya, Kompany and maybe Aguero and Fernandinho in a couple of years) and we finally have some academy players making a breakthrough. I think City's expenditure may reduce significantly in comparison with some other clubs. Unless they buy Messi, Neymar and Kane of course.
I don't see City reigning in their spending. Not sure how much input Pep has, but this is the man who paid 50m plus Eto'o for Zlatan to add to an already all conquering side. You add from a position of strength. That's what Ferguson was best at in his prime, he never let the squad go stale (until his latter years). You need new faces to maintain competitive spirit.
I expect you'll spend another 200m.
And, how much would you see Utd, Chelsea, Liverpool..etc spending?
£200m would probably be a reduction though when you take transfer inflation into account?
Since the Abu Dhabi regime took charge of City in '08 they have spent a little over £1 billion on transfer fees alone. United by comparison have spent just shy of £750 million. These figures do not incorporate netspend simply because I personally consider such to be irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.
What is largely more relevant is the trophy haul of the respective clubs during that period.
CL trophies: City 0 United 1
League titles: City 2 United 3
FA cups: City 1 United 1
League Cups: City 1 United 1
*please bear in mind that above statistics are formed entirely from memory. Feel free to point out any errors of which I will happily rectify.
Very interesting, thanks a lot.
United Won EPL and CL: May 2008
City taken over by ADUG : August - September 2008.
CL trophies: City 0 United 0
League titles: City 2 United 2
FA cups: City 1 United 1
League Cups: City 1 United 1.
All square.
Last edited:
You are not taking in to account the discussions between Shinawatra & Mansour prior to the take over in August '08. I consider this an essential part of the purchasing process, thus any trophies won during that period become relevant.
Plus removing one of United's CL trophies would adversely affect the agenda behind the post. That's just not on.
Other posters almost accurately indicated that City’s net spend on transfers in the last decade was about 950m, compared to United’s 650m.
However, I am not sure this addresses your question, as there is a difference between amount spent on City and amount spent on transfers, because part of that transfer spending whould have been funded by operations. I eastimate that portion to be at least 25%.
Another way of looking at it, is to look at accumulated losses, which stands around 600m.
Now someone would say, and rightly so, when it comes to funding from operations, how could a bigger club like United only spend 300m more than city in 10 years (other 600m being owner funded). Well the answer is simple, you only have to look at amounts spent on servicing the debt and paying dividends. Those +700m could have been easily spent on transfers (in theory), thus showing the big gap between the two clubs in operational power. This gap is logically shrinking with time.
Can Roy Hodgson beat them?
Not quite. United 3 trophies ahead I think. It’s 5-5 since City won the first trophy under the current ownership in 2011. A pedant might say it’s 5-4 to City as United won the league at Blackburn in 2011 a few hours before City won the FA Cup on the same day but I’m not going to be that much of a twat about it!
For what it’s worth, since breaking our duck in 2011 I think we’re probably 2 or 3 trophies short of what we ought to have won considering the outlay.
I don’t think that’s a fair criticism. English football will learn and continue to evolve. Just look at how Wenger, Mourinho, and even Benitez have changed the premier league.
But, did the British coaches evolve with them?
That was the chance to beat them: 93rd minute Palace penalty saved by City keeper.
Better get the chequebook out, can't be drawing games like that.
Pep panics and bids for Sanchez tomorrow. Quick, spend more money.
Townsend had a golden chance too. Palace were more then worth their point.