Man City £££'s a good thing?

[900triumph]

OK here's a theory for you all to rip apart.

Team 1 (Man Yoo?) is a financial giant, more spending power than any other in the Prem. They pretty much buy against the best in Europe, and accumulate the best home and abroad, to consolidate their dominent position, won initially by an astute manager.

Then Team 2 (Chelsea) enter the same mega market for both players and managers. Team 1 no longer get all the top players they want, and have to fight out the Prem. as well as only taking a share of the top players, but there are still enough significant players signed by both teams to keep one step ahead of the pack.

As their teams mature there is a status quo for 3 or four seasons, same pattern, still signing enough quality each to stay ahead.

Then, as their teams start to age, Team 3 (Citeh) finds a big cheque book and starts to compete in the market for top,top triffic players. Suddenly, together with continued competition from yer wily Continentals, there are not enough superstars attracted to any one club to give it that massive an advantage. Strange quirky results start to occur as the rest of the Prem. are able to live with the (not now so) mega teams. It helps that the newbies struggle to find the right man to manage, and the fly in the theoretical ointment has been Wenger all along, but it's a hell of a lot more fun.

My hope is that a 4th well funded team will emerge to dilute the talent further, and my fear is that Chelsea may fade along with Abramovich's interest as Man Yoo are suffocated in an avalanche of debt.

Any comments,counter theories or general abuse welcome.

 

[Luka Lennon]

you're a tit

 

[Archibald&Crooks]

My counter theory is that you didn't know there's a General Football forum.

You do now.:wink:

 

[chinaman]

I think when Manure was at its best, almost their entire squad was home-grown with just a smattering of purchased players like Cantona. Even Manure are no match to the Spanish giants and the top Italian clubs before the economic downturn as far as the strength of their cheque book is concerned.

As regards Shitty, they are no different to Chelscum; both rely on a sugar-dad.

A very good example of buying young potential and developing them into superstars is sad to say our north London rivals. Levy seems to be adopting the same policy though we dont have as astute a manager as Wenger. I'm not saying Harry is not good, but Wenger is totally on a higher plane.

 

[SpurSince57]

I think when Manure was at its best, almost their entire squad was home-grown with just a smattering of purchased players like Cantona. Even Manure are no match to the Spanish giants and the top Italian clubs before the economic downturn as far as the strength of their cheque book is concerned.

As regards Shitty, they are no different to Chelscum; both rely on a sugar-dad.

A very good example of buying young potential and developing them into superstars is sad to say our north London rivals. Levy seems to be adopting the same policy though we dont have as astute a manager as Wenger. I'm not saying Harry is not good, but Wenger is totally on a higher plane.

Depends on what you mean by that.

There's no doubt that Levy wanted us to adopt the Arsenal/Wenger model, but the problem for us has been that, whereas Wenger inherited an extremely strong squad that gave him time to build up that youth policy, our managers had no such luck; Jol (let's forget Fruitini) had to build from what was pretty much a basket case.

Wenger, despite being a Grade-A git, is a great coach, ad it really breaks me up to read some of the comments about him on Arse-Mania. You have to have respect, however grudging, for a guy who decides his team is going to play entertaining passing football no matter what. I don't think he's a great tactician, though.

Harry's a very smart operator in the transfer market, we know that, and he's a much better coach than he's given credit for being—and if he can't do the coaching, he knows a man who can.

 

[RussellYid]

Depends on what you mean by that.

There's no doubt that Levy wanted us to adopt the Arsenal/Wenger model, but the problem for us has been that, whereas Wenger inherited an extremely strong squad that gave him time to build up that youth policy, our managers had no such luck; Jol (let's forget Fruitini) had to build from what was pretty much a basket case.

Wenger, despite being a Grade-A git, is a great coach, ad it really breaks me up to read some of the comments about him on Arse-Mania. You have to have respect, however grudging, for a guy who decides his team is going to play entertaining passing football no matter what. I don't think he's a great tactician, though.

Harry's a very smart operator in the transfer market, we know that, and he's a much better coach than he's given credit for being—and if he can't do the coaching, he knows a man who can.

Or seven or eight men who can!

Love our 'Arry!

 

[worcestersauce]

This scenario has already played out over the last seven years.
Before that there was Man Utd and arseanal and then Chelsea came along with the Abramovitch money and stuck a bomb in the cosy top two club, the Chelsea money had an effect on Utd but nothing like the effect it had on the arsenal as chelsea went out and bought the players they would have bought, Drogba & Essien are two examples I'm convinced wenger would have wanted and as they both came through the French system that would have been the natural progression not to mention the Ashley Cole thing.
The arsenal side was at the stage where it was going to need rebuilding and all of a sudden they found themselves gazumped at every turn leading to the last five years of failure, so without a standing start like the defence he inherited and the inside knowledge of young French talent that is now available to everyone perhaps arsene wenger isn't capable of creating a top side just a very good one.

I guess the more clubs that can afford big wages the more diluted the top pool of players will become as a player may be happy to sit on Man Utd's bench earning more than he can anywhere else, given the choice he would rather play elsewhere if he could earn that same money hence the Tevez move to City and maybe that means that the clubs with the squad of "nearly" top pool players are in with a chance of challenging.

 

[Stavrogin]

There also the danger that Man C will raise the stakes and teams like Chelsea, Utd and maybe liverpool reconfigure themselves to spend more - thus in fact concentrating the talent pool.

It seems unlikely but who can say how the ownership of those clubs will change in the next few years?

That's why this season feels so important for us, there's the risk that Man City could actually shut the door on us.

 

[hellava_tough]

There also the danger that Man C will raise the stakes and teams like Chelsea, Utd and maybe liverpool reconfigure themselves to spend more - thus in fact concentrating the talent pool.

It seems unlikely but who can say how the ownership of those clubs will change in the next few years?

That's why this season feels so important for us, there's the risk that Man City could actually shut the door on us.

But how will they do that?

Abramovic might dig deep into his pockets, but the other two can't - they're up to their eye-balls in debt. And if Liverpool don't make the Champions League they're in even more trouble.

 

[fortworthspur]

Im afraid City will replace Liverpool or Arsenal and just make it harder for us.

 

[haxman]

Im afraid City will replace Liverpool or Arsenal and just make it harder for us.

I call it an inevitability. If we miss out on 4th and City got it it wouldn't be the end of the world - they're going to buy their way into it anyway over the next few years. If they do it at the expense of Liverpool or Arsenal - particularly Liverpool who have financial difficulties already, it could mean big trouble for those clubs. I'm afraid there's nothing we can do about it except try to match them, but with the bottomless pit of money City have it's just a matter of time till they get CL.

 

[dontcallme]

City's money is a good thing as it is a new injection of cash into the game. Many clubs have had to rely on selling players for a nice profit to keep going. There's no way any of the sky 4 would pay £24m on Lescott. Man City get their man and Everton get a nice fee and bought a player of similar ability for £20m less. Blackburn have also got a lot more for their players as a result of City's wealth.

The introduction of the Premiership changed things. No longer could teams get relegated and return a strong as before. Football has become a buyers market more than ever and the pulling power of the CL means the mst successful team get all the best players. At the beginning it was one CL place and Man Utd dominated, then it was two and the Wenger v Ferguson rivalry began and then it was four. Inevitably a powerful four was going to emerge. It has been an almost impossible barrier to break. Everytime a team gets the right players to potentially challenge they are taken away. The league has become dull.

Man City have changed things though. They used the power of money to counter the pull of the CL. Not an intelligent approach but successful. Arsenal players have left for a bigger pay packet and within 3 seasons Man City should be a regular CL team. The talent will be slightly diluted but in time all that will happen is Liverpool will become a shadow of their past and Man Utd, Arsenal, Chelsea and Man City will be the new "sky four."