- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Man City's "out of control spending" is a myth
Posted on 3/23/15 at 10:54 am
Posted on 3/23/15 at 10:54 am
Transfer table for the last 5 seasons
LINK
As you can see, they have only spent a couple million per season more than Chelsea or Man United.
LINK
As you can see, they have only spent a couple million per season more than Chelsea or Man United.
3
Posted on 3/23/15 at 10:58 am to Draconian Sanctions
:inb4SCH:
Posted on 3/23/15 at 11:03 am to Broski
DS vs. SCH
10 pages
10 pages
Posted on 3/23/15 at 11:03 am to Broski
Didn't know it was that close.
I think it seems like City spends more because they haven't really let anyone who is that good walk.
I think it seems like City spends more because they haven't really let anyone who is that good walk.
Posted on 3/23/15 at 11:05 am to Draconian Sanctions
good thing they were bought in 2007
this is to date since 92
Chelsea £1,060,949,000 £415,275,000 £645,674,000 £28,072,783
2 Manchester City £893,880,000 £262,453,000 £631,427,000 £27,453,348
3 Manchester United £759,350,000 £360,040,000 £399,310,000 £17,361,304
4 Liverpool £767,305,000 £441,090,000 £326,215,000 £14,183,261
since 2007 City has spent more than United has since 92
now please shut up and sit in the corner
even your own chart shows net which includes players sold which you are using your argument on
so in actually players bought its more way more that 2 million a year even with united spending 150 million.
this is to date since 92
Chelsea £1,060,949,000 £415,275,000 £645,674,000 £28,072,783
2 Manchester City £893,880,000 £262,453,000 £631,427,000 £27,453,348
3 Manchester United £759,350,000 £360,040,000 £399,310,000 £17,361,304
4 Liverpool £767,305,000 £441,090,000 £326,215,000 £14,183,261
since 2007 City has spent more than United has since 92
now please shut up and sit in the corner
even your own chart shows net which includes players sold which you are using your argument on
so in actually players bought its more way more that 2 million a year even with united spending 150 million.
This post was edited on 3/24/15 at 10:12 am
Posted on 3/23/15 at 11:07 am to StraightCashHomey21
So in terms of spending you have
Chelsea
City
Power gap
Utd
Liverpool
Power gap
Arsenal
Spurs
Chelsea
City
Power gap
Utd
Liverpool
Power gap
Arsenal
Spurs
This post was edited on 3/23/15 at 11:08 am
Posted on 3/23/15 at 11:07 am to Tennessee Jed
Pretty much
this thread is a weak attempt
on avg City spends 10 million more a season despite not spending every season in the top flight since 92.
this thread is a weak attempt
on avg City spends 10 million more a season despite not spending every season in the top flight since 92.
This post was edited on 3/23/15 at 11:09 am
Posted on 3/23/15 at 11:09 am to StraightCashHomey21
You have stated before that you have no problem with an initial spending surge to build up a club, but it should level off over time. The numbers clearly show that City has done exactly that, their spending habits are in line with the other two "power" clubs in the BPL.
Posted on 3/23/15 at 11:10 am to McCaigBro69
quote:
Didn't know it was that close.
I think it seems like City spends more because they haven't really let anyone who is that good walk.
United in the last 2 years, spent alot
Clearly bc this last window. But City has spend over 100 million multiple times.
DS is trying but failing.
Posted on 3/23/15 at 11:10 am to StraightCashHomey21
Their wage inflation is a bigger problem.
Posted on 3/23/15 at 11:12 am to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
You have stated before that you have no problem with an initial spending surge to build up a club, but it should level off over time. The numbers clearly show that City has done exactly that, their spending habits are in line with the other two "power" clubs in the BPL.
you are a special kind of stupid
City only spent 60 million this year net bc of FFP, they would have spent more if they were allowed to and didn't have restrictions.
The year before they spent £87,500,000
the year before £103,200,000
just stop.
This post was edited on 3/23/15 at 11:12 am
Posted on 3/23/15 at 11:12 am to StraightCashHomey21
quote:
Clearly bc this last window. But City has spend over 100 million multiple times.
Doesn't matter, when you average it out they are spending the same as ManU and Chelsea are. That's just a fact.
Posted on 3/23/15 at 11:13 am to StraightCashHomey21
quote:
United in the last 2 years, spent alot
Clearly bc this last window. But City has spend over 100 million multiple times.
City have spent over $100 mil four times since the 07-08 seasons. That's more than half, but I don't think it's "overspending".
This post was edited on 3/23/15 at 11:14 am
Posted on 3/23/15 at 11:14 am to StraightCashHomey21
quote:
they would have spent more
Would have spent more isn't spending more, now is it?
Posted on 3/23/15 at 11:14 am to STLhog
quote:
Their wage inflation is a bigger problem.
I agree.
A team full of guys making over 150K-200k a week
Do we pay crazy wages, Yea Rooney and RVP and now Falcao are on stupid per week. That will drop back down soon and level off.
Posted on 3/23/15 at 11:15 am to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
Doesn't matter, when you average it out they are spending the same as ManU and Chelsea are. That's just a fact.
City in 7 years have spent more than United or Liverpool since 1992.
This isn't hard to figure out.
Posted on 3/23/15 at 11:15 am to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
Would have spent more isn't spending more, now is it?
bc they are not allowed too
and even their manager has complained about not being able to buy more players
This post was edited on 3/23/15 at 2:01 pm
Posted on 3/23/15 at 11:17 am to StraightCashHomey21
quote:
City in 7 years have spent more than United or Liverpool since 1992.
This isn't hard to figure out.
Are those numbers adjusted for inflation?
Posted on 3/23/15 at 11:21 am to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
Are those numbers adjusted for inflation?
How about this table since 2003, when transfer fees started to really go up. This four years before the take over.
Chelsea £924,009,000
Manchester City £795,920,000
Manchester United £593,450,000
Liverpool £608,180,000
200 million more than United almost 200 more than Liverpool.
This post was edited on 3/23/15 at 11:23 am
Posted on 3/23/15 at 11:25 am to StraightCashHomey21
You know how I know you are a supporter of a club in the shadow of their noisy neighbor?
Page 1 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News