January 2015 Transfer Window DISCUSSION Thread

  • There is only one thing weirder than posting on internet forums... lurking on internet forums!
    Registration only takes a minute and removes most of the adverts. You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Register to remove

Pre Sky : Scholar (when football was down to natural progression)
Post Sky : Levy (you buy your sucess/trophies)
For me, two periods of football history that are not comparable, IMO
That is an interesting point, I sort of agree but there is an element of things always being the same, the Leeds side of the seventies spending more than other teams. Even our sixties side broke transfer records to remain at a competitive level.

I think the team that tends to spend the most money usually ends up being successful, that's just become more true over time. Some might say that the bigger landmark was the point where the wage cap on players was removed.

Sky is a contentious one, they funded league football to make it one of the most marketable domestic leagues in the world and the champions league something that all top European sides wanted .

I think football had been corrupted long before they came along. What they did though was change the focus of the top flight teams, who were lowered priority on all other competitions, the cup winners cup died a death, people still don't take the Europa League seriously, the League and FA Cup often sees weaker squads being played and this is because glory has been outweighed by money. That is down to Sky marketing their products so well and us for all buying in to it as much as the clubs have too.
 

Fidel Castro

Tractors for the people.
pre Sky and certainly before the 80's the FA cup was very nearly the equal of the league (Premier)
and certainly more glamorous . The League Cup was a poor, poor second . Today it
has been a Race to the bottom .Both are cannon fodder compared with the pursuit of a
champs league place.
Certainly money has played apart , but never to the level of today . Clough's 70's Forest and Derby , Robson's Ipswich would have never have prospered in today's closed shop . In the 60's various provincial teams competed
at the highest level , regularly appearing in cup finals . The 70's actually had second division teams winning
the FA Cup.
Through rose tinted glasses l regard the 60,s as a golden age , World Cup 66, far more varied , local teams
prospering with local support , on a cultural level Britain' dominating Pop Culture , Wilson keeping us out
of the stupidity of Vietnam , counter culture , Che , British invasion etc .
With Sky l haven't fell for it , l don't care who wins the league as the Viagra clubs will win 90% year on.
I never watch any one else than who is playing us , the game today has so little glory . The product
is sold to a gullible naive audience .
Today corruption at all levels is the name of the game.
 
Actually on a lot of what you say you're absolutely right.

But, in the case of Forest and Derby, they had backers, local businessmen, much like Martin Edwards at Manchester United. Back then you only need be a millionaire to fund some success, now it's foreign billionaires who never grew up with a love for their local teams.

Exactly as you have said Manchester City of Chelsea would never have become such hollow corporate shells if they hadn't been bought as an oil billionaire's toy. But Forest, Derby or Ipswich are only one rich person's whim away from being the next European Champions which is not necessarily a good thing!
 

ArcspacE

BINNED AGAIN
Billionaries have been around for decades, not a new phenomenon per se - look at some of the Italians clubs of recent years - Internazionale, AC Milan, etc. - backed by some of the richest men at the time. When Ronaldo signed for Inter in '97 it was massive
 
That is an interesting point, I sort of agree but there is an element of things always being the same, the Leeds side of the seventies spending more than other teams. Even our sixties side broke transfer records to remain at a competitive level.

I think the team that tends to spend the most money usually ends up being successful, that's just become more true over time. Some might say that the bigger landmark was the point where the wage cap on players was removed.

Sky is a contentious one, they funded league football to make it one of the most marketable domestic leagues in the world and the champions league something that all top European sides wanted .

I think football had been corrupted long before they came along. What they did though was change the focus of the top flight teams, who were lowered priority on all other competitions, the cup winners cup died a death, people still don't take the Europa League seriously, the League and FA Cup often sees weaker squads being played and this is because glory has been outweighed by money. That is down to Sky marketing their products so well and us for all buying in to it as much as the clubs have too.
I agree, teams that get the better players seem to have more sucess in whatever era. I just feel then, the sucess was more of a natural progression. Whereas now the top few clubs buy the cream without having the necessary sucess. The Scum are a good examples of this.
 

Register to remove

No one creaming in their pants that we missed out on fatty Bony after his emphatic impact on Man City since January....?

:kaneear:

Should have taken a risk on Benteke while we had half a chance.

Now he looks up for it, happy and motivated, and has a manager who (rightly) will tell us to go fuck ourselves if we go in for him.
 
People talk about how poor our defensive record is but i really cannot stress how important it is to bring in a designated sitting DM (with the ability to pass the ball). Benteleb is far better suited to the box to box role and Mason is good cover (but again he's a box to box player). We need DM...doesn't necessarily have to be the tough tackling DM type but one that is positionally very good, can read the game and can also pass the ball.
 

eanN17

Supporter
During his three years in the Premier League Benteke has scored 39 goals. Kane has scored 23 since last April. It's all fair telling everyone how much a player is worth is when he's on fire, but Benteke hasn't been like this all the time? Also, are we sure he can keep it going?

Decent player, but not sure he is worth the 30m Villa would want..
 
People talk about how poor our defensive record is but i really cannot stress how important it is to bring in a designated sitting DM (with the ability to pass the ball). Benteleb is far better suited to the box to box role and Mason is good cover (but again he's a box to box player). We need DM...doesn't necessarily have to be the tough tackling DM type but one that is positionally very good, can read the game and can also pass the ball.
Michael Carrick I miss you.
 
During his three years in the Premier League Benteke has scored 39 goals. Kane has scored 23 since last April. It's all fair telling everyone how much a player is worth is when he's on fire, but Benteke hasn't been like this all the time? Also, are we sure he can keep it going?

Decent player, but not sure he is worth the 30m Villa would want..
Yeah but the point being that people wanted us to spunk that on Bony in January when Benteke is the better footballer
 

Register to remove

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom