Like Tree294Likes

Premier League 2013/14 early predictions

Closed Thread
Page 46 of 135 FirstFirst ... 38 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 54 ... LastLast
  1. #451

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,880
    Quote Originally Posted by shenwen:
    you are talking to someone who actually went to games in the 80s and can categorically say: you are talking bullshit.

    yes, we made one or two big signings during the 80s (Robson and Pallister stand out) but did not spend massively and certainly not more than our rivals at the time. Compare for example our spending v Liverpool. In fact, even City regularly spent far more than utd did at that time (and indeed throughout the 90s and 00s).

    if you can prove differently, I would love to see the numbers
    I can't tell whether you're taking the piss! It's well accepted that man United bought their way to success. They had to because their team was pretty shit. if you were there, you'd knows better than anyone.Aside from breaking the English record (which in itself demonstrates they outspent their rivals) on Robson, man u spent massively a bunch players including Bruce too. I'll try and dig out done articles on it. Ferguson magically transforming a failing man United side is the bullshit.

  2. #452

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    3,251

    The good old days when Man Utd were shite. Remember them fondly. I remember going to a game at Old Trafford to watch Nottingham Forrest beat them and kick them out of the FA cup. That was a great day although celebrations were cut short at the next game.


  3. #453

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,259
    Quote Originally Posted by iliketurtles:
    I can't tell whether you're taking the piss! It's well accepted that man United bought their way to success. They had to because their team was pretty shit. if you were there, you'd knows better than anyone.Aside from breaking the English record (which in itself demonstrates they outspent their rivals) on Robson, man u spent massively a bunch players including Bruce too. I'll try and dig out done articles on it. Ferguson magically transforming a failing man United side is the bullshit.
    Good luck digging it out. I have a feeling once you do, you may surprise yourself.

    You are contradicting yourself all over the place. United bought their way to success? With Robson? You sure? Man City once broke the spending record with Steve Daley. Forest also with Trevor Francis. And Villa with Andy Gray. Did those clubs buy their way to success? (Note: neither Utd nor City enjoyed any success in the 80s, aside from two FA cup wins for utd and a Wembley double from Tommy Hutchison )

    And Steve Bruce? Cost 800,000 from Norwich. Decent money in those days but in no way outrageous (in the same year Juventus paid 3.2 million for Ian Rush)

    You see, saying something like "well accepted" only shows you have bought into the myth. Seriously, check out comparative spending from English first division clubs up to 1992.

    Don't enter an argument unless you really know your stuff. At least Trebor has a leg to stand on. Utd did begin spending big (as in sustained big spending rather than one-off big money buys) after 2006. I just disagree with him over the extent of the failures - but he is bang on with what he says in terms of money spent.

  4. #454

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    7,471
    Quote Originally Posted by shenwen:
    At least Trebor has a leg to stand on.

  5. #455

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,259

    Okay Turtles, will dig it out for you.

    Just because I hate this myth that United bought success, especially in the 80s (along with all mancs support city), as opposed to me being very pedantic, here are the total spending for 84/85 season to 87/88 season (chosen at random, amounts rounded up):

    MU - 5.3
    AFC - 2.7
    LFC - 8.5
    EFC - 6
    THFC - 7

    between 88/89 and 92/93 (the period during which SAF had to rebuild the team resulting in first title) spending increases, but not by much comparatively
    MU - 24.5
    AFC - 12
    LFC - 22.5
    TFC - 18
    BRFC - 20

    Only in one year - 89/90 - did utd outspend their rivals, spending 11m to LFC's 4m. In the year utd won the title (92/93) they spent less than all the teams above.

    source:http://www.transfermarkt.com/en/

    and this is gross not net. Net spend paints another picture. See: http://therepublikofmancunia.com/tro...-ferguson-way/ (admittedly a biased source)

    Anyway, back to current Premier League, we will be lucky to make Europa places


  6. #456

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Wanchai
    Posts
    5,063

    I wasn't having a dig by the way although happy with the bite i got .

    I was just saying that it's not fair to label other teams as having 'bought the title' when in essence every single team that has won the premier league, including Blackburn, has spent big to make sure it happens.

    Man United to a lesser extent in the mid nineties to early 00's (But let's not forget Ferdinand 30m, Veron 28m, V Nistelrooy 19m, Forlan 7.5m, Barthez 7.8m, Yorke 12.6m, Stam 10.75m and Cole 6m)

    Special mention to Taibi @ 4.5m hahahaha now that really was a failure.

    The simple fact is, teams need to buy the best players in order to win trophies and that will obviously cost money. Some teams are just luckier than others in inheriting a sugar daddy (chelsea, city) or more clever in terms of penetrating the overseas markets before everyone else (man united).


  7. #457

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,880

    Shenwen, calm yourself down. There's nothing less credible than an angry little Man United fan.

    Let me remind you what I originally said:

    With the risk of setting Shenwen on another meltdown, Man Utd's successes was actually borne out of spending massively in the late 80s. This was before the mid-90s when the likes of Scholes and Becks came through.
    What you just provided me demonstrates EXACTLY what I said: Manchester United SPENT MASSIVELY to achieve their success. Yes, one or two other teams did the same, but that doesn't absolve the fact that Manchester United did, and that SAF didn't miraculously come in and transform their existing side into league winners.

    Don't be a pillock. You can have a reasonable conversation without going into meltdown.

  8. #458

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    7,471
    Quote Originally Posted by shenwen:

    between 88/89 and 92/93 (the period during which SAF had to rebuild the team resulting in first title) spending increases, but not by much comparatively
    MU - 24.5
    AFC - 12
    LFC - 22.5
    TFC - 18
    BRFC - 20
    I'll be honest, I'm struggling to see how that supports the argument that MU didn't outspend their rivals to win the title!
    iliketurtles likes this.

  9. #459

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,880

    Plucking random teams isn't as useful as plucking the top two/three and comparing the performances each year against money spent. See below.

    Season 85/86: MUFC 4th (939k), LFC 1st (400k), EFC 2nd (1.1mil)
    Season 86/87: MUFC 11th (65k), EFC 1st (2.4mil), LFC 2nd (700k)
    Season 87/88: MUFC 2nd (2,7mil), LFC (5.5mil) 1st NFFC 3rd (600k)
    Season 88/89: MUFC 11th(2.02mil), AFC 1st (0) LFC 2nd (850k)
    Season 89/90: MUFC 13th (11 mil), LFC1st (3.8mil), AVFC 2nd (1.4mil)
    Season 90/91: MUFC 6th (1,4mil), AFC 1st (2mil), LFC 2nd (2.3mil)

    Yes, these are gross fees, and no, I don't have the time to net these off against all the teams I listed above. The point I made was the amount of money MUFC spent.

    It is quite clear that in the late eighties, MUFC spent an absolute wad load (which they had to do) to achieve their successes. The only myth is that Man U fans cannot accept this.


  10. #460

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,880

    So, re-quoting Shenwen:

    Don't enter an argument unless you really know your stuff. At least Trebor has a leg to stand on. Utd did begin spending big (as in sustained big spending rather than one-off big money buys) after 2006.
    Don't patronise people, especially when you yourself provide the evidence for the counter of your argument (i.e. my argument). If Trebor has one leg to stand on, and I apparently have no legs to stand on, you're full blown quadriplegic!
    Trebor likes this.

Closed Thread
Page 46 of 135 FirstFirst ... 38 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 54 ... LastLast