Pep's spending is insane (£941m and counting at City)

Here's a discussion for you all...

Would United have spent as much as City had if we had Pep in charge? I think the answer is most likely.
 
Davs said:
Here's a discussion for you all...

Would United have spent as much as City had if we had Pep in charge? I think the answer is most likely.
Click to expand...
I think so. Pep is very cautious in that he wants multiple expensive players for the same position in case of injury/rotation. He also isn't huge on youth so there's that too. A big part of him taking the City job was unlimited resources as a fallback option. I think if we were really aggressive in getting him he'd have gotten such assurances at us too.

Not to mention I think the recruitment would have been even easier for him. There's no way he'd have lost out on all of Sanchez, Fred, Jorginho if he was Manchester United manager.
 
Son Of Sam said:
We finished 2nd. The only team that finished above us spent more money than us. If Jose could finish 2nd with that dross of a squad, imagine what he would have achieved with Silva, KDB, Aguero, Fernandinho, Sterling, Kompany, etc.
.
Click to expand...
Yeah I wonder how Sterling and Fernandinho would perform for Mou. Meanwhile poor Jose has to work with Pogba and Lukaku.
 
Davs said:
Here's a discussion for you all...

Would United have spent as much as City had if we had Pep in charge? I think the answer is most likely.
Click to expand...

No, simply because United do not have the funds available to allow for an unrestricted spending spree. Same is true of any football club the world over besides PSG.
 
Schneckerl said:
Yeah I wonder how Sterling and Fernandinho would perform for Mou. Meanwhile poor Jose has to work with Pogba and Lukaku.
Click to expand...

Yeah.....keep following the biased media. Hazard’s best season ever was under Jose. Ozil’s most productive season in his entire career was at Madrid under Jose.
The whole noise by the British media that Jose can’t coach attacking players is a myth pulled out of a baboon’s rectum.
 
Josep Dowling said:
I’ve been having a look at the true cost of the City squad since Guardiola arrived and it really is insane. United are always perceived as big spenders. The number of articles I read where they go ‘Pogba, who cost £90m’ or ‘Lukaku, who hasn’t lived up to his £90m transfer’, when he cost £75m.

These transfer valuations are from transfermarkt. Since Guardiola joined City he has spent £540m. That is £150m more than United in the same space of time. And this doesn’t consider how inflated the market has gone over the last 3 years. I think we can say prices have more than doubled since his first season where he spent £192m.

Remember when they took the moral high ground last year over Sanchez’s wages? Money over Pep? Well they still managed to spend £285m on players.

When you consider the main core of his team was already there - De Bruyne, Aguero, D. Silva, Fernandinho, Sterling, Otamendi and Kompany - that is mental.

I don’t get care how wonderful his football is meant to be (personally I find watching a team with 70% possession quite boring), he can never be regarded as the best managers that has ever lived with his record in the transfer window.

It was the same when he was at Barcelona. He signed Zlatan for £59m plus Eto’o. That was basically £100m back in 2010!
Click to expand...
Peps only been here for 2 years, we’ve been operating in the inflated market for sure, but even if you assume we weren’t and just assess his transfers, the value for money is there. Spending lots of money is easy, having a good hit rate and turning them into a top side isn’t a given. In reality he’s taken the squad we had to what we did last year in £340m net spend, of which Laporte £60m was bought after the title was wrapped up and Mendy £50m was injured all year.

He deserves a touch of credit perhaps. If not just for his good eye in the market!

Season 16/17:
Sane £45m
Stones £50m
Jesus £28m
Gundogan £24m
Nolito £16m
Bravo £16m
Moreno £4m
Zinchenko £2m
In: £185m Out: £32m Net: £160m

Season 17/18:
Laporte £58m
Mendy £50m
Walker £50m
Bernardo £45m
Ederson £36m
Danilo £27m
In: £266m Out: £86m Net: £180m

Nothing there is nuts.
 
Manchester Dan said:
Peps only been here for 2 years, we’ve been operating in the inflated market for sure, but even if you assume we weren’t and just assess his transfers, the value for money is there. Spending lots of money is easy, having a good hit rate and turning them into a top side isn’t a given. In reality he’s taken the squad we had to what we did last year in £340m net spend, of which Laporte £60m was bought after the title was wrapped up and Mendy £50m was injured all year.

He deserves a touch of credit perhaps. If not just for his good eye in the market!

Season 16/17:
Sane £45m
Stones £50m
Jesus £28m
Gundogan £24m
Nolito £16m
Bravo £16m
Moreno £4m
Zinchenko £2m
In: £185m Out: £32m Net: £160m

Season 17/18:
Laporte £58m
Mendy £50m
Walker £50m
Bernardo £45m
Ederson £36m
Danilo £27m
In: £266m Out: £86m Net: £180m

Nothing there is nuts.
Click to expand...
He has spent insane amount of money there is no two ways about it but he has also made sure he created something special with that. I never have managers spending money , it's just when fans for their comfort call Jose a cheque book manager and Pep is not. Heck even klopp is nothing but a cheque book manager.
 
Manchester Dan said:
Peps only been here for 2 years, we’ve been operating in the inflated market for sure, but even if you assume we weren’t and just assess his transfers, the value for money is there. Spending lots of money is easy, having a good hit rate and turning them into a top side isn’t a given. In reality he’s taken the squad we had to what we did last year in £340m net spend, of which Laporte £60m was bought after the title was wrapped up and Mendy £50m was injured all year.

He deserves a touch of credit perhaps. If not just for his good eye in the market!

Season 16/17:
Sane £45m
Stones £50m
Jesus £28m
Gundogan £24m
Nolito £16m
Bravo £16m
Moreno £4m
Zinchenko £2m
In: £185m Out: £32m Net: £160m

Season 17/18:
Laporte £58m
Mendy £50m
Walker £50m
Bernardo £45m
Ederson £36m
Danilo £27m
In: £266m Out: £86m Net: £180m

Nothing there is nuts.
Click to expand...

To a City fan... why because you haven’t bought a player for over £60m?

You still have 7 players in the starting line up that Pep had before he joined. So he has spent over £500m to fill 5 players in his first 11. How can you not see that as mental?

Who buys a £58m defender when a defender is out for a couple of months? They don’t even play in the same position.

Net spend la.

I don’t get why City fan deny you have spent far more than anyone else, and consistently for 10 years now.
 
I think we’re all arguing about the wrong thing here, the whole “net spend” thing sets for a good debate, but the fact that city have inflated and destroyed the market for lower league sides and as a whole needs more examining.

The TV money back in the 90’s was bad enough, but it was spread out amongst the clubs in far more equal measure.

These oil rich owners are taking the game and turning it into a real life version of monopoly where the just buy up all the real estate and leave the rest scrounging in the dirt.

What is there to be said when the 2 Manchester clubs have spent over a billion pounds in a few short years?
 
Manchester Dan said:
Peps only been here for 2 years, we’ve been operating in the inflated market for sure, but even if you assume we weren’t and just assess his transfers, the value for money is there. Spending lots of money is easy, having a good hit rate and turning them into a top side isn’t a given. In reality he’s taken the squad we had to what we did last year in £340m net spend, of which Laporte £60m was bought after the title was wrapped up and Mendy £50m was injured all year.

He deserves a touch of credit perhaps. If not just for his good eye in the market!

Season 16/17:
Sane £45m
Stones £50m
Jesus £28m
Gundogan £24m
Nolito £16m
Bravo £16m
Moreno £4m
Zinchenko £2m
In: £185m Out: £32m Net: £160m

Season 17/18:
Laporte £58m
Mendy £50m
Walker £50m
Bernardo £45m
Ederson £36m
Danilo £27m
In: £266m Out: £86m Net: £180m

Nothing there is nuts.
Click to expand...


By today's standards no, but at the time some of those were very expensive.
 
Manchester Dan said:
Peps only been here for 2 years, we’ve been operating in the inflated market for sure, but even if you assume we weren’t and just assess his transfers, the value for money is there. Spending lots of money is easy, having a good hit rate and turning them into a top side isn’t a given. In reality he’s taken the squad we had to what we did last year in £340m net spend, of which Laporte £60m was bought after the title was wrapped up and Mendy £50m was injured all year.

He deserves a touch of credit perhaps. If not just for his good eye in the market!

Season 16/17:
Sane £45m
Stones £50m
Jesus £28m
Gundogan £24m
Nolito £16m
Bravo £16m
Moreno £4m
Zinchenko £2m
In: £185m Out: £32m Net: £160m

Season 17/18:
Laporte £58m
Mendy £50m
Walker £50m
Bernardo £45m
Ederson £36m
Danilo £27m
In: £266m Out: £86m Net: £180m

Nothing there is nuts.
Click to expand...

City were the primary contributors to the inflation of the transfer market which, coincidently, came about directly after the arrival of one Shiek Monsour and his takeover of City. Pep has since continued the 'spend ludicrous amounts of money in the transfer market' trend set by previous managers of your club.
 
Son Of Sam said:
Yeah.....keep following the biased media. Hazard’s best season ever was under Jose. Ozil’s most productive season in his entire career was at Madrid under Jose.
The whole noise by the British media that Jose can’t coach attacking players is a myth pulled out of a baboon’s rectum.
Click to expand...
So basically Jose would have had 101 points with last years' City tram if I'm correct, based on your calculations?
 
That net spend thing has to be the most tiring cliche ever used whenever your club gets accused of over spending, just revert to net spending and world is great again and you didn't spend a lot
 
Random Task said:
City were the primary contributors to the inflation of the transfer market which, coincidently, came about directly after the arrival of one Shiek Monsour and his takeover of City. Pep has since continued the 'spend ludicrous amounts of money in the transfer market' trend set by previous managers of your club.
Click to expand...
You could more than make a case about City being a primary contributor to wages' inflation back in the day, but why would it be true for transfer fees?
 
el3mel said:
That net spend thing has to be the most tiring cliche ever used whenever your club gets accused of over spending, just revert to net spending and world is great again and you didn't spend a lot
Click to expand...
Well it's not like anyone forced United not to sell Darmian or not to extend Rojo's contract for a year or two, is it?
 
SqualorVictoria said:
Well it's not like anyone forced United not to sell Darmian or not to extend Rojo's contract for a year or two, is it?
Click to expand...

Thought we're talking about City crazy spending here, being the only English club who spent +200m in one summer and all that. United didn't spend anything higher than 150m each summer for years.
 
United's spending since Ferguson left has been just as ridiculous.

I don't know how United fans can judge Man City, to be honest.
 
Prometheus said:
United's spending since Ferguson left has been just as ridiculous.

I don't know how United fans can judge Man City, to be honest.
Click to expand...

No it's not. Get your facts on first.

United didn't spend any thing higher than 150m each summer since Fergie retired. That's a very ordinary budget and most clubs even spend higher than that. You had a crap summer past year and still ended up spending about 170-180m. Liverpool spent +170m this summer as well. 150m isn't a high budget.

City are the only English club who spent +200m in one summer.
 
Prometheus said:
United's spending since Ferguson left has been just as ridiculous.

I don't know how United fans can judge Man City, to be honest.
Click to expand...
I totally agree. Just because City have spent a couple of million more doesn't mean United should be losing to the likes of West Brom and Newcastle, and finishing whatever amount of points behind City.

Also Mourinho has spent a lot of money during his career. Look at his first season at Chelsea, he practically bought the league.
 
Manchester Dan said:
Peps only been here for 2 years, we’ve been operating in the inflated market for sure, but even if you assume we weren’t and just assess his transfers, the value for money is there. Spending lots of money is easy, having a good hit rate and turning them into a top side isn’t a given. In reality he’s taken the squad we had to what we did last year in £340m net spend, of which Laporte £60m was bought after the title was wrapped up and Mendy £50m was injured all year.

He deserves a touch of credit perhaps. If not just for his good eye in the market!

Season 16/17:
Sane £45m
Stones £50m
Jesus £28m
Gundogan £24m
Nolito £16m
Bravo £16m
Moreno £4m
Zinchenko £2m
In: £185m Out: £32m Net: £160m

Season 17/18:
Laporte £58m
Mendy £50m
Walker £50m
Bernardo £45m
Ederson £36m
Danilo £27m
In: £266m Out: £86m Net: £180m

Nothing there is nuts.
Click to expand...

This is a bit of an ironic comment given that one of the main reasons the market is inflated is due to City over spending on players. No one else was going to pay £50m for the likes of Stones, Walker or Mendy. Now it's standard. Guess why?

I don't really understand why City fans get so touchy about this, as it doesn't change the fact that you won the league breaking eveyr record going, and that the players/manager had to perform to do that, but it also isn't really something that is up for debate as it's black and white fact that you've outspent everyone else. United can't compete with it and United themselves outspend everyone in England but City.

There was a diagram going round after the January transfer window showing the net spend of all the notable clubs in Europe weighed against general transfer value at the time of spending. United, PSG etc. were on a different spending level to most other teams, but then City were way out in their own little bracket an absolute mile from everyone else. So actually are probably the single most responsible club for the inflated market.

Pep wouldn't have spent the same mone here because it just doesn't exist for him to spend, or if it does it certainly wouldn't be made available to him. This is why I have some sympathy with Jose when he makes this point...although only some as his whining is far from limited to pointing this out and it's not like he's feeding off scraps.

I do think there's a fairlly obvious pattern though. City spend the most, City win. Barcelona and Real spend the most in Spain, one of the two wins. Bayern outspend everyone in Germany, they win every year. Arguing against it is a bit like standing on a step so you're taller then claiming the reason your taller isn't because you're standing on a step.
 
One thing I can bet my life on is that had Pep taken over United we won't still be having Young, Valencia or Darmian as full backs in his third season. Nor have Fellaini in midfield for that matter
 
All managers are exactly the same. Guys like Klopp might talk about how they want to 'do it another way', but as soon as they're handed the resources they will immediately make use of them. They'd be fools to handicap themselves based on prinicipals of developing youth, most managers in the world only care about the next couple of seasons. Most examples of turning to youth are when a club has an injury crisis or if it's an exceptional case, or a club like Monaco where that's their strategy. The biggest sides can't afford to be patient with young players, it's why the likes of Foden need to get out as soon as they can.

These guys are under immense pressure. One poor season and the fans are on their back, christ Guardiola was a fraud after one year of finishing fourth in the league, you're only as good as your last season as far as the media are concerned. The position they're in is one which demands instant results, they don't have the luxury that the likes of Ferguson had of building something slowly up, they're working in a pressure cooker environment in which clubs will sack a manager at the drop of a hat.

Fans are exactly the same, they'll jump on other teams for spending money but will be quick to make as many excuses as possible when their own club does it. Liverpool fans are a great example of this, for years the narrative was other teams were killing the league with big spending, we do it the right way etc, and now it's whack out the net spend figures to justify huge fees spent. Our own fans make similar arguments but truth is they'd all love it if we started spending like City or United, fans want their team to do as well as possible and generally don't really mind how they get there. I don't think any other manager in Pep's situation would be spending less, there was a rebuild job needed at City with a number of their old core ageing (Zabaleta, Kompany, Toure etc) and others just no longer good enough, like Hart. He saw the issues in the team and went out and fixed them, what manager wouldn't in his position?
 
This season he doesn't really need to. They've fixed their big issues, brought in the guy they wanted in Mahrez and that's that. I'm gunna go ahead and say if a 'special' player had come available on the market then City would have been right up there competing but this season a splurge wasn't necessary for them.
 
Josep Dowling said:
To a City fan... why because you haven’t bought a player for over £60m?

You still have 7 players in the starting line up that Pep had before he joined. So he has spent over £500m to fill 5 players in his first 11. How can you not see that as mental?

Who buys a £58m defender when a defender is out for a couple of months? They don’t even play in the same position.

Net spend la.

I don’t get why City fan deny you have spent far more than anyone else, and consistently for 10 years now.
Click to expand...
They have spent a lot, but they have spent quite wisely. Bar Bravo and probably Laporte and Gundogan, they could get more money that they spent on for every player they have signed. And bar Bravo, every signing has been a hit.
 
el3mel said:
No it's not. Get your facts on first.

United didn't spend any thing higher than 150m each summer since Fergie retired. That's a very ordinary budget and most clubs even spend higher than that. You had a crap summer past year and still ended up spending about 170-180m. Liverpool spent +170m this summer as well. 150m isn't a high budget.

City are the only English club who spent +200m in one summer.
Click to expand...
Since SAF left, United has spent more than any other club bar City and possibly PSG.
 
el3mel said:
Thought we're talking about City crazy spending here, being the only English club who spent +200m in one summer and all that. United didn't spend anything higher than 150m each summer for years.
Click to expand...

United didn’t spend higher than 150m? Really?if swap player doesn’t count as spending , then you should compare the net spending.
 
Last edited:
They're doing exactly what we used to do. Once you're in a position of strength, you consolidate that position.

They spend more than everyone. But so what? We did it for decades.

It must be pretty nice to spend £40-50m on every player without managing a transfer budget. Doing so on back up players is somewhat annoying but every manager would if he could.

They have no financial considerations at all.
 
hkjack said:
United didn’t spend higher than 150m? Really?if swap player doesn’t count as spending , then you should compare the net spending.
Click to expand...

Again the net spending cliche. I didn't even use it and said we spent 150m each summer but if I ended up using it then LVG had got rid of +20 players in his 2 seasons and added only 9 and the total net spend in the 2 years together was 103m. It was only Mourinho who didn't sell much thus thus the net spend in each one of his 2 years was 140-150m, still very average, and still there net spend is the most tiring cliche ever used o defend your club. I did try to avoid it from the start bcause the only one who should care about is the club board to evaluate the resources and financial position of the club.

And no, sweeping doesn't count as spending.
 
Revan said:
They have spent a lot, but they have spent quite wisely. Bar Bravo and probably Laporte and Gundogan, they could get more money that they spent on for every player they have signed. And bar Bravo, every signing has been a hit.
Click to expand...

Yes because the market has inflated.
 
Pep is a genius for spending all that money and bringing in players that suit his way of playing. He has huge resources and knows exactly what he wants to go out and buy. Fair enough.

People tend to forget that we have competed well with City for years after their oily takeover. Just this City team is probably the strongest they have ever had. Although money is a crucial part of it, it's clearly not all. Saying that any manager can get similar results with similar resources is wrong.

As an aside, how much pressure you guys think Pep has on him to win the Champions League? Surely just winning the league should not be acceptable for this team. Do you think he has a set number of years to try and win the big prize or his position may come under threat?
 
Since 2013 City have spent 828m and recouped 224m. Utd have spent 679m and recouped 186m. Pep's first two seasons saw a lot of players coming and going but this season has been relatively settled.
Interestingly City have a nice little side earner by selling youngsters. They have pulled in over 53m by selling young players who haven't got near the first team plus another 25m if you include Iheneacho.
Pep in his first season had the luxury of bringing in about 10 players leaving only 2 move on. But in his second season he purged his inherited squad moving on 13 players plus 3 he brought in himself.
 
Looking at transfer fees in isolation is pretty pointless when wages are at a truly astronomical size. They should also be factored into the equation, we've over-payed for years without the lure of CL football and a consistent challenging for trophies.
 
Random Task said:
City were the primary contributors to the inflation of the transfer market which, coincidently, came about directly after the arrival of one Shiek Monsour and his takeover of City. Pep has since continued the 'spend ludicrous amounts of money in the transfer market' trend set by previous managers of your club.
Click to expand...
When we signed Lukaku last summer, the three most expensive transfers of British football history were all United signings (since then Morata and Mahrez have overtaken Di Maria by a couple hundred thousand pounds). We are as much to blame for the inflation of the market as anyone.
 
Utd fans complaining about another team spending vast sums of money is irony personified.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.