So close to being Top tier European Club

[LondonOllie]

What I wish for is instead of us having fans believing we need to spend more to compete, is for the league both domestically and internationally to implement control measures for all clubs. As has been chatted about before, salary caps and spending limits.
I would love to see how we would stack up against the European super-clubs in 5 years if they were all forced to reign in their spending.

It's one of the things I like about watching the NFL. Yes you do get teams that continue to be great due to a solid core, but you also get various teams in the mix for the Superbowl and dynasty's don't go on forever in the league. In the last decade there has been 8 or 9 different winners if memory serves me right.

 

['O Zio]

Man City have spent shit loads and have won 3 league titles in the last 7 years..... and yet even Pep recognises that they are not on the same level yet as the likes of Mardrid, Barca etc.

Think about that for a minute.

Even if we spend £200m and won the league and became serious contenders ( and I’m sure bigger investment would give us a good chance), we wouldn’t be an elite club.

So right now, I’m afraid, no we are not close at all.

Spot on.

Also I might add that this 200m the OP reckons that we need, let's be honest, nowadays the kind of world class players that he's talking about us needing cost around 100m just in transfer fee. By the time you include agent fees, massive wages for 5 years etc. etc. just one real "difference maker" type player would already eat up pretty much all of that 200m on his own. So this idea that it'll buy us 4 or 5 players and make us one of the best teams in the world is just complete pie in the sky stuff

 

[coys200]

Spot on.

Also I might add that this 200m the OP reckons that we need, let's be honest, nowadays the kind of world class players that he's talking about us needing cost around 100m just in transfer fee. By the time you include agent fees, massive wages for 5 years etc. etc. just one real "difference maker" type player would already eat up pretty much all of that 200m on his own. So this idea that it'll buy us 4 or 5 players and make us one of the best teams in the world is just complete pie in the sky stuff

The most City have spent on a player is around £60m. I think Mahrez is their biggest buy and it’s hard to imagine he is on more than £200k. The Key areas to put us seriously there with City is a world class CM and I’m struggling to think of one that would cost £100m. And then if you want to talk about an mbappe type player is there even another one out there ? You could easily find 2 top quality players for £150m if you know what you’re doing. And the £200m was net spend so it would actually be a £300m spend.

 

[Shadydan]

The most City have spent on a player is around £60m. I think Mahrez is their biggest buy and it’s hard to imagine he is on more than £200k. The Key areas to put us seriously there with City is a world class CM and I’m struggling to think of one that would cost £100m. And then if you want to talk about an mbappe type player is there even another one out there ? You could easily find 2 top quality players for £150m if you know what you’re doing. And the £200m was net spend so it would actually be a £300m spend.

You are so naive it's unreal.

 

[coys200]

You are so naive it's unreal.

Please expand ? I’d love to know exactly what you think we need to challenge city ?

 

[thebenjamin]

Please expand ? I’d love to know exactly what you think we need to challenge city ?

Their wage bill is £200m larger than ours - per season.

 

[rez9000]

The most City have spent on a player is around £60m. I think Mahrez is their biggest buy and it’s hard to imagine he is on more than £200k. The Key areas to put us seriously there with City is a world class CM and I’m struggling to think of one that would cost £100m. And then if you want to talk about an mbappe type player is there even another one out there ? You could easily find 2 top quality players for £150m if you know what you’re doing. And the £200m was net spend so it would actually be a £300m spend.

Dude, your argument doesn't stand up.

Your basic premise is that at this precise moment in time, we have everything we need to be one of Europe's elite clubs except for a squad that is strong enough and that a rich benefactor will be able to provide that. That's a faulty premise, for a number of reasons:

First: where are these rich benefactors?

Second: football finance. You seem to view football finance as a simple transactional system whereby funds can be moved into and out of the club very easily. It doesn't work that way. For a start, simply dumping £200 million into the clubs coffers can't be done in the UK. A 'capital contribution' is common in other parts of the world, particularly the USA, but isn't recognised in corporate law in the UK. The guidance states that if a capital contribution can be defined as a loan then it should be. So as soon as the sugar daddy has come in and put money into the club, the club is lumbered with a massive debt. This is why Man City have been pissing all over FFP: because their owner can't simply transfer money into the club - they've had to do it by manipulating contracts.

Third: let's say the money does somehow land in the club's coffers and we go out and buy three top notch players. How do we know that those players will be right for the club? What if one, two or all of them turn out to be like Pogba at Man U? Expensive acquisitions that simply don't work for the club.

Fourth: there's football itself. Let's say we get three players we need and they work really well and then we simply don't win anything? For all their strength so far this season, Liverpool haven't actually won anything with their new acquisitions yet. Man City were tipped to win the quadruple last year, but only won two competitions ("only"!). Simply put, football isn't played on paper.

FIfth: what 'elite' actually means. Elite does not mean strong. Even if had the strongest squad in Europe, our new stadium, and our state-of-the-art training facilities, and let's say we go on and win the Premiership or the Champions League. That still doesn't make us elite. An elite is a entity or group that sits at the very top of a thing. And that only comes with consistency. We would have to do what Real Madrid has done, Barcelona has done, Bayern Munich has done, Juventus has done. Won consistently, year-in, year-out over the course of decades. In the last 40 years, Barcelona and Real Madrid have won at least one trophy in 31 of those years, Man U in 27, Bayern Munich in 26, and Juventus in 25. By comparison, in that same time, we have won only six trophies. We are a massive club, but we are not in the same bracket as those I mentioned. To get there, to be truly considered in the 'elite' of Europe will take a minimum of 20 years of sustained, consistent success. If we look back in 20 years time and find that we've won something in say, fifteen of those seasons, then we can call ourselves amongst the elite of Europe.

 

[Shadydan]

Please expand ? I’d love to know exactly what you think we need to challenge city ?

City have unlimited resources.

unlimited

Which means that money isn't a problem for them, so if we did try and attempt to match their spending all they're gonna do is raise the bar and spend more on players and wages next season and so on.

 

[therhinospeaks]

Tas bang on the money as usual.

 

['O Zio]

The most City have spent on a player is around £60m. I think Mahrez is their biggest buy and it’s hard to imagine he is on more than £200k. The Key areas to put us seriously there with City is a world class CM and I’m struggling to think of one that would cost £100m. And then if you want to talk about an mbappe type player is there even another one out there ? You could easily find 2 top quality players for £150m if you know what you’re doing. And the £200m was net spend so it would actually be a £300m spend.

Sorry mate but that's just naive assumption after naive assumption. You're assuming that just because we want a player, clubs will just let us have them for a fair price, you're assuming that players will want to come to us over the 6 or 7 other clubs that would be in for them at those prices, you're assuming that they'll accept a below market-value salary to join us, you're assuming that every single player we sign would just slot in and instantly be a perfect fit from the word go, you're assuming that having a good team automatically results in winning trophies, and you're assuming that other clubs will happily take our dead wood off our hands for an inflated fee to fund all this. Plus, as I said before, even if all of this fell into place by some miracle, it would still take us decades of prolonged success to be considered truly elite. Winning the league once or twice means you've got a good team, it does not make you an elite club.

Like I said before mate, I appreciate the sentiment but nothing you've said adds up in the real world.

 

[coys200]

Sorry mate but that's just naive assumption after naive assumption. You're assuming that just because we want a player, clubs will just let us have them for a fair price, you're assuming that players will want to come to us over the 6 or 7 other clubs that would be in for them at those prices, you're assuming that they'll accept a below market-value salary to join us, you're assuming that every single player we sign would just slot in and instantly be a perfect fit from the word go, you're assuming that having a good team automatically results in winning trophies, and you're assuming that other clubs will happily take our dead wood off our hands for an inflated fee to fund all this. Plus, as I said before, even if all of this fell into place by some miracle, it would still take us decades of prolonged success to be considered truly elite. Winning the league once or twice means you've got a good team, it does not make you an elite club.

Like I said before mate, I appreciate the sentiment but nothing you've said adds up in the real world.

Do you think city or Chelsea were in a better position than us when they got taken over of course they weren’t. And both were serious title challengers within 2 years. So considering we are in a better position than both those clubs were, I have absolutely no idea why it would take decades ?

Bemused people don’t think getting taken over by mega money won’t improve us. And currently we only need to improve 6 pts to be challenging. Every mega money injection in terms of building a title team has worked in the last 30 years. Blackburn Chelsea and city all of who started from lower points.

 

[rez9000]

Do you think city or Chelsea were in a better position than us when they got taken over of course they weren’t. And both were serious title challengers within 2 years. So considering we are in a better position than both those clubs were, I have absolutely no idea why it would take decades ?

Bemused people don’t think getting taken over by mega money won’t improve us. And currently we only need to improve 6 pts to be challenging. Every mega money injection in terms of building a title team has worked in the last 30 years. Blackburn Chelsea and city all of who started from lower points.

Because you said 'elite'. I quote:

Was just thinking we are literally a Levy phone call away from being up their with the very elite in Europe

You didn't say we're only a few players away from winning a title. Most of us would probably agree with that idea. You said we are only a short way from being amongst the elite of Europe. And the short answer to that is no, we're not. The long answer is my post above, which I feel constrained to say you didn't present any counter-arguments to...

 

['O Zio]

Do you think city or Chelsea were in a better position than us when they got taken over of course they weren’t. And both were serious title challengers within 2 years. So considering we are in a better position than both those clubs were, I have absolutely no idea why it would take decades ?

Bemused people don’t think getting taken over by mega money won’t improve us. And currently we only need to improve 6 pts to be challenging. Every mega money injection in terms of building a title team has worked in the last 30 years. Blackburn Chelsea and city all of who started from lower points.

The problem with that is that first of all the money going around in football has gone through the roof since they were starting out their financial doping, especially in terms of Chelsea. Back then 30m was an astronomical amount of money for a player but nowadays that same player would cost around 100m. The money doesn't even go half as far nowadays. Also they were able to just inject a load of cash no questions asked because it was before FFP came into effect. And in City's case, they've been able to use their immense wealth and power to circumnavigate the FFP rules. We wouldn't necessarily have that luxury.

And anyway, you're missing the point, nobody on here has said that being taken over by mega money won't improve us. That's not what anyone's saying. The point is that being taken over by mega money won't automatically make us challengers overnight and it certainly won't make us one of the truly elite mega clubs like Barca, Real, Bayern etc. which you seem to be suggesting can be achieved within a couple of seasons. That's what people disagree with. Well that, and the fact that you think 200m could buy us 4 or 5 world-beaters that would somehow make us better than City. To go from our level of squad to City's level of squad would cost triple that easily. And to become an "elite" club would take decades of continued success.

 

[therhinospeaks]

That's not what he's alluding too.

 

[vegassd]

Do you think city or Chelsea were in a better position than us when they got taken over of course they weren’t. And both were serious title challengers within 2 years. So considering we are in a better position than both those clubs were, I have absolutely no idea why it would take decades ?

The footballing landscape is very different these days. When Chelsea first won the league under Abramovich there wasn't a huge deal of competition at the top. It was that time when 50-60 points would get you a top 4 place. They were the first of the new wave of money teams and as such the way was much clearer for them. Both City and Chelsea have spent something like £1.4bn each on player transfers under Abramovich, Shinawatra and Mansour - it's silly money.

Thankfully for us, football isn't just about the money which means we do have a chance of beating both of those teams, and in fact any team in the world. But it's for precisely that reason that coming up with a net spend figure has very little bearing on our success on the pitch.

Where I think you're right is that we have been steadily removing obstacles to success. The training facilities, the stadium, the corporate deals etc. Whilst those things aren't a barrier to a one-off trophy win I think they are the difference makers in terms of long-term and continued success.

Our team has already scored enough points in a single season that would have won the league in a different season. That's fairly meaningless but shows we are already at that top level domestically. We don't need a big spend in my opinion - we need a good team mentality and some consistency. We need the fans fully behind the team and to be patient during the frustrating times.

If we embrace the idea that Poch's approach does not require expensive players things become much rosier and more rewarding in my opinion.

 

[coys200]

That's not what he's alluding too.

Given up mate like talking to a brick wall. They say signings will improve but won’t put us with city. We are only 5 pts behind. So signings will only improve us 2 pts ? Lol.Anyway that wasn’t even the point of the whole thread. The points was the infrastructure is near on perfect and the only thing now stopping us being at the top table is the mega money.

The £300m is basically irrelevant maybe it’s £400m. The point is mega money and 4 or 5 signings. And as FFP is 3 seasons and our revenue is about to go to £450m we could spend £500m and not even be questioned as our current 3 season total is basically £0.

 

[vegassd]

Given up mate like talking to a brick wall. They say signings will improve but won’t put us with city. We are only 5 pts behind. So signings will only improve us 2 pts ? Lol.Anyway that wasn’t even the point of the whole thread. The points was the infrastructure is near on perfect and the only thing now stopping us being at the top table is the mega money.

This is the exact problem with the posts you have made - the idea that the only way for us to start winning things is to have a mega rich investor. It's not true.

If you make a post on here and find that lots of people instantly disagree with you in fairly strong terms, that's a good indication that your own point of view might have flaws. Don't just assume that everybody else is stupid and you are talking to a brick wall. Try and understand what those other people are saying and test the validity of your own argument again.

 

[wizgell]

The Chelsea/Man City model of spending big and delivering trophies works for people who like the shiny things about football and for the media who love to push it as the way forward but in reality it's flawed beyond all belief.

I love the way we go about our business. Of course there are frustrations with transfers because as fans we like to see those big names being brought into our club but gone are the days when signing an absolute gem like a Klinsmann or even a VdV happen. In the modern game anyone that can tie their own laces is considered a big money signing and the fees are ridiculously inflated.

The only reason our model isn't lauded by the media is because we add no value to Transfer Deadline Day, Summer Rumour Mills and we aren't bringing in these 'big names' that the FIFA generation want to see playing in the 'EPL' (as it's irritatingly referred to by people up and down the country).

But I would much rather see our club build a great squad, in a sustainable manner under a truly special manager than enter into that never ending circle of Spend Big>Win A Trophy>Don't Win a Trophy>Sack a manager>Spend Big that these supposed 'big clubs' are now in.

 

[coys200]

This is the exact problem with the posts you have made - the idea that the only way for us to start winning things is to have a mega rich investor. It's not true.

If you make a post on here and find that lots of people instantly disagree with you in fairly strong terms, that's a good indication that your own point of view might have flaws. Don't just assume that everybody else is stupid and you are talking to a brick wall. Try and understand what those other people are saying and test the validity of your own argument again.

The reason is that most just aren’t grasping what I’m saying. I’m talking much more about perception of the club. There’s is obviously a tick list to be regarded as a top European club. For me even though Chelsea had all their success they were never really regarded as there with Real or Barca. I suspect that’s because it never really felt sustainable because of the stadium. Where as City feels all round a much more complete model. And for me they are only a CL away from sitting with Barca and Real. So I’d argue there’s nothing stopping us getting to city level if the funding was there.

 

[aliyid]

3 years ago we were a regular Europa league team who occasionally challenged for the final CL place. As far as signing new players went we couldn't attract top-tier players as their main criteria are:

• Regular CL
• Realistic title challenge
• High wages

3 years later (almost) everything in our control has gone as well as we could have hoped.

• Displaced Arsenal, Chelsea & Utd in league
• Established ourselves as regular champions league (3 years running)
• Built new stadium to increase turnover and allow us to increase playing budget (signings + wages)

Once we start to recoup the additional revenue from the stadium (incl NFL & Sponsorship) we'll be in a position to compete with the big boys as far as wages go. This ticks off two of those criteria for top players to consider us. but we can't start to pay those wages until we've seen the revenue flowing in (FFP prevents us from artificial growth).

Seeing as everything has gone to plan over the last three years (excluding City & Liverpool growth which is out of our control) we would be crazy to cut things off now and get a Glazier/Kroenke just as we're on the cusp of what could be our most exciting period in recent memory.