re: Since 2011 City has only made 2 major changes to its starting XI while spending

You're like talking to a child. Here I'll explain it again so maybe this time you'll understand.

The point of FFP is to prevent out of control spending. FFP exempts spending on infrastructure because it helps clubs become self sustaining. In order to spend out of control city just build pointless infrastructure that will in no way help them sustain themselves.

In regard to "what I think" don't be such a literal douche. What are you in high school? I'm referencing actual spending on legitimate self sustaining policies. A building means little. Hell, our academy is a shite hole, structurally. What counts and what builds an academy is its staff more than walls and floors.

Of course I wouldn't be amused if we missed a CL spot. But I see many positive moves by my club to maintain self sustaining success for decades to come. You and your tin foil hat claim we're part of some imaginary "old guard" that works to suppress other clubs. In reality we were hours from administration 5 years ago. On the brink of non-existence. Four years later we almost took the title from a team who, again, spent a billion dollars in the past decade. This year our squad is the most in form team in Europe after losing one of the world best players.

Things are looking up. And we didn't have to spend a billion dollars for them to get that way.

quote:

---

The point of FFP is to prevent out of control spending. FFP exempts spending on infrastructure because it helps clubs become self sustaining. In order to spend out of control city just build pointless infrastructure that will in no way help them sustain themselves.

---

We've been around the bend on this a million times and I don't want to do so again, that said I have no problem with a rule that prevents an owner from saddling a club with debt. I do have a problem with preventing them to spend their own cash to bring in good players. Without this, you're essentially permanently freezing who the top clubs are right now into infinity. I don't think that's a good thing. Just use your Southampton example, they have done everything right and still can't crack the top 4. I don't think that's good for the game nor do I agree with telling owners how to run their teams. You're free to disagree with that, but don't act like you're some paragon of soccer virtue because FFP directly protects your club from further competition.

quote:

---

And we didn't have to spend a billion dollars for them to get that way.

---

Solely because you won the great manger lottery back in the day. I don't think that entitles you to a permanent competitive advantage.

quote:

---

In reality we were hours from administration 5 years ago. On the brink of non-existence.

---

quote:

---

This year our squad is the most in form team in Europe after losing one of the world best players.

---

I agree with the majority of your post but easy on the hyperbole.

quote:

---

Look at the stats since January. We're the only team in Europe outside of Wolfsburg

---

and the best team since October is arsenal in englan

I guess but your only big win in that time has been City, Spurs maybe, both at home.

You got knocked out of two Cups and are coming off a 0-0 home draw in another.

That said you guys are playing well for sure and I'd trade your league form for ours in a heartbeat. Just don't know if I'd go so far to say best in Europe.

By that same argument why have teams like Villa, Preston, Everton, Leeds, Wednesday, Portsmouth, Derby, etc. fallen so far then? All have storied histories with long spells of winning. Why is liverpool special? It's not because of the history, it's because of the management/front office we have in place right now.

quote:

---

By that same argument why have teams like Villa, Preston, Everton, Leeds, Wednesday, Portsmouth, Derby, etc. fallen so far then? All have storied histories with long spells of winning. Why is liverpool special? It's not because of the history, it's because of the management/front office we have in place right now.

---

Well #1 those clubs all had a few nice seasons here and there but nothing like what Liverpool had.

Good management is obviously a factor as well. It will be less of a factor under FFP because teams will be prevented from bringing in the players they need to compete at the highest levels.

I would love for it to still be true that a great manager or player personnel director could come in and build a club into a champion, but that's just not the reality today. You have to spend money if you want to compete, which FFP is preventing for all but the privileged few. Even SCH said in a previous thread that he wouldn't have a problem with an initial large investment in players to kick start a club.

I'm fine with an initial investment. But the rate at which City spends is just ridiculous at this point.

Well #1, Liverpool spends a LOT of money on transfers. Let's not pretend they don't. How many of your regular starters are homegrown Liverpool players? They have done a relatively good job in the transfer market and hey, that's great for Liverpool. I don't have a problem with how Liverpool does it's business. What I do have a problem with is you ripping another club for doing what it has to do to be competitive.

If I were running Manchester City, I would have done things a bit differently, but I don't think that just because they did it their own way that somehow makes them "evil". Their owners made a decision about how they wanted to spend their money, and they have gotten what they have gotten out of it. Perhaps they have underachieved in a manner of speaking, but they also have won 2 Premier League titles, which is 2 more than Liverpool have ever won so they can't be THAT much of a joke as you claim they are.