We need a sugar daddy to compete.

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

08-06-2011, 01:28 PM
LDG

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKBapologist

Oh, so your one of those who think 30mill in the bank is "money to spend" - With signing on fees, first year of wages as well as agent and transfer fees it's precisely fuck all in this market. He's probably already spent 10 mill of that with the youngsters and he probably spent a similar amount all together on transfers last season.

Writers player of the year: Scott Parker
Players Player of the year: Monkey Welsh Spudcunt

Tell me. How much did they cost their respective clubs. And which of those teams had a sugar daddy.
08-06-2011, 01:29 PM
selassie

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKBapologist

Are people thick or something?

I'll be proved right at the end of the summer me thinks. Either way, I'm not absolving Wenger from blame, but do you think Mancini would have won anything with our squad or budget? I guess if you do then there's no hope for any of us.

No, you're just saying that we need billions to compete when that patently isn't the case.

We have a few problems right now.

1. Our Manager doesn't seem capable of rectifying some 'long term' issues in the Squad, namely the issues with Central Defence/Set Pieces. In addition to the Defence issues, we have a bloated squad now with a number of players who don't contribute anything to the team who are on over-inflated wages.

2. We seemingly have a cultural/attitude problem amongst members of the Squad.

3. Our Manager won't spend the necessary amount of money to bring in established quality.

You state we need a Sugar Daddy to compete, do you think exclusively throwing money at the problems highlighted will solve our problems? In fact it's a mute point anyway because I'm pretty certain that if Wenger was given Millions to spend he would still refuse to spend it.
08-06-2011, 01:30 PM
Flavs

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKBapologist

Oh, so your one of those who think 30mill in the bank is "money to spend" - With signing on fees, first year of wages as well as agent and transfer fees it's precisely fuck all in this market. He's probably already spent 10 mill of that with the youngsters and he probably spent a similar amount all together on transfers last season.

I dont wish to come across rude here, but what the fuck are you talking about??
08-06-2011, 01:31 PM
AKBapologist

Quote:

Originally Posted by budesonide

Yes; if mancini or any manager came in and decided he was not going to make excuses for poor performance and address the deficiencies in the team , then yes we coulfd have won the carling cup.

If the manager who comes in is going to take issue with players like bendtner,denilson,diably,eboue, etc all on huge salaries for nothing and invest the money in proven or experienced players, then we can win something or be able to beat teams like fulham.

If the manager who comes in decides to take set-pieces seriously so that we can score from corners as well and defend them too -- then yes our squad can win things.

That is the argument GB,LDG,myself and others have been making.

So you see, all those do not require a sugar-daddy

The season before last, we where beating all the lower league teams handily, and we where all complaining about not being able to beat our competitors. You've latched to a problem that's only really developed THIS season - and has come off the back of some SHOCKING individual performances from players WE ALL KNOW NEEDED TO BE REPLACED, but weren't replaced with the quality needed - or just weren't replaced at all.

Mancini without yaya toure this season would have gotten sacked. These days, players of that quality (for example) just aren't interested in joining us.
08-06-2011, 01:31 PM
budesonide

Quote:

Originally Posted by selassie

In fact it's a mute point anyway because I'm pretty certain that if Wenger was given Millions to spend he would still refuse to spend it.

Spot on;

Wenger has said that much. And his track record proves it too.
08-06-2011, 01:33 PM
AKBapologist

Quote:

Originally Posted by budesonide

Spot on;

Wenger has said that much. And his track record proves it too.

And if we had an owner who didn't put up with that crap and demanded more, he's be gone. Why are you making this false argument, regurgitating GB's point about how this is all the managers fault?
08-06-2011, 01:35 PM
Flavs

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKBapologist

The season before last, we where beating all the lower league teams handily, and we where all complaining about not being able to beat our competitors. You've latched to a problem that's only really developed THIS season - and has come off the back of some SHOCKING individual performances from players WE ALL KNOW NEEDED TO BE REPLACED, but weren't replaced with the quality needed - or just weren't replaced at all.

Mancini without yaya toure this season would have gotten sacked. These days, players of that quality (for example) just aren't interested in joining us.

Thats Yaya who cost some 20mil and is on £140k a week? Thank god we didnt get him if thats what it costs.
08-06-2011, 01:36 PM
AKBapologist

Quote:

Originally Posted by Punchinello Beezo

I dont wish to come across rude here, but what the fuck are you talking about??

You claim that we have the money to spend. In relative terms, we really don't. 30mil? 50mill? Compared to the 90-120mill Chelsea and United are about to spend?
08-06-2011, 01:38 PM
AKBapologist

Quote:

Originally Posted by Punchinello Beezo

Thats Yaya who cost some 20mil and is on £140k a week? Thank god we didnt get him if thats what it costs.

He's actually on 200k a week, but thats the calibire of players we used to have in a team with "mentality" and all that other shit.
08-06-2011, 01:39 PM
LDG

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKBapologist

You claim that we have the money to spend. In relative terms, we really don't. 30mil? 50mill? Compared to the 90-120mill Chelsea and United are about to spend?

You may have missed this earlier :)

Writers player of the year: Scott Parker
Players Player of the year: Monkey Welsh Spudcunt

Tell me. How much did they cost their respective clubs. And which of those teams had a sugar daddy.
08-06-2011, 01:39 PM
Flavs

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKBapologist

He's actually on 200k a week, but thats the calibire of players we used to have in a team with "mentality" and all that other shit.

Ok so just as a posing question, how much do you think Fabregas should be on?
08-06-2011, 01:42 PM
budesonide

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKBapologist

The season before last, we where beating all the lower league teams handily, and we where all complaining about not being able to beat our competitors. You've latched to a problem that's only really developed THIS season - and has come off the back of some SHOCKING individual performances from players WE ALL KNOW NEEDED TO BE REPLACED, but weren't replaced with the quality needed - or just weren't replaced at all.

And whose fault is that? And whose fault was it that the situation couldn't even be arrested when the manager (on 6mil a year) came out to say we will fight till the end".

Individual performances? --- i don't think so! As a team we cannot defend; and it has been a problem for years now. We cannot even take corners properly. So i suppose what we need is a sugar-daddy to sign a 5o million player to take corners for us. Isn't wenger the one who professes technical football acumen?
08-06-2011, 01:42 PM
Joker

We can't complain about sugar daddies when the major problems at this club stem from Wenger's poor managerial decisions in the last 5 years. Moreover, I don't think that Sunderland, Blackburn, West Brom, Bolton, Newcastle etc are richer than us, yet they all took points off us last season.
The problems are closer to home, and we cannot look at Man City or Chelsea and blame them for our failings. The problems inherent at the club have been around for many years, long before City were taken over.
08-06-2011, 01:44 PM
AKBapologist

Quote:

Originally Posted by Punchinello Beezo

Ok so just as a posing question, how much do you think Fabregas should be on?

The going rates for marquee players in this league is about 200k-250k per week.

And LOL at LDG using the most overrated players in the league as an argument for anything.
08-06-2011, 01:46 PM
Kano

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKBapologist

Scouting is getting harder. Not only has the scouting systems of our rivals improved. News of our interest spreads faster, and rarely do we enter final negotiation without any rival bids - which results in us having to play inflated fees for unknowns...

Inflation in transfer fee's is insane - and It's not going to end. In the EPL, a greater distribution of wealth from TV money has meant that clubs no longer need to sell for as little as they did before. Lower league teams are also in a much more stable financial position - and can hold on to their stars shrugging off all but the most insane bids from the biggest clubs.

Inflation in wages has also followed. Not only does that make us a lot less attractive club for perspective targets to come too, it has a massive disruptive effect on our own squad with our stars looking else where whenever they underperform.

The top clubs are earning more and more. Yes, their debts are huge but it's likely that there'll be bringing in more revenue due to having recent success and competent marketing departments. It's likely even Liverpool will continue to outspend us without drawing attention to the Fair Play Rulings (which I don't think take into account current levels of debt)

AND these sugar daddies aren't going away, they'll be building bigger stadiums, improving their youth and scouting systems catching up on the framework we've already built, whilst achieving success... Yes, At a cost, but football was never suppose to be a business and I no longer think it's correct to believe that billionaire owners purchase clubs to make a few million pounds a year on dividends...

No, I'm not asking for a Glaizer style, debt driven take over, and no - I'd be less than thrilled if Usmanov with his questionable history or an Abramovich style meddling owner came in.

What I'm asking for however, is a honest look at the realities of the situation. For the club to able to match the aspirations of the fans, we must accept that sustainable financing will no longer be relevant given this new age where money = titles. Without an urgent change in course, it's more likely than ever that everything we've accomplished could collapse in an ever accelerating talent draining spiral, the likes of which we seem set to experience this summer.

so you want someone to come in, pay off all the debts and spend big too? it won't happen given the way we've financed the stadium.

we've got two huge potential investors but they won't spend big or pay off the debts as they can watch their share value rise and as the debt falls. every investor wants a significant return at any club
08-06-2011, 01:47 PM
budesonide

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKBapologist

And if we had an owner who didn't put up with that crap and demanded more, he's be gone. Why are you making this false argument, regurgitating GB's point about how this is all the managers fault?

what, so we just need a sugar-daddy just to tell wenger to wake the fuck up?

if so, then we are royally fuc*ked --
08-06-2011, 01:47 PM
AKBapologist

Quote:

Originally Posted by budesonide

And whose fault is that? And whose fault was it that the situation couldn't even be arrested when the manager (on 6mil a year) came out to say we will fight till the end".

Individual performances? --- i don't think so! As a team we cannot defend; and it has been a problem for years now. We cannot even take corners properly. So i suppose what we need is a sugar-daddy to sign a 5o million player to take corners for us. Isn't wenger the one who professes technical football acumen?

WHY do you keep on talking as if I'm trying to defend Wenger - totally indifferent on him as a manager at this point. You certainly need an owner to change manager, so please sit down and shut up.
08-06-2011, 01:47 PM
Flavs

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKBapologist

The going rates for marquee players in this league is about 200k-250k per week.

And LOL at LDG using the most overrated players in the league as an argument for anything.

You think that "marquee" players such as Yaya Toure should be on that amount? Then i am even more glad we dont have someone at the top sanctioning such moves and a manager who can keep us in the top 4 without joining such stupidity.
08-06-2011, 01:49 PM
Flavs

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKBapologist

so please sit down and shut up.

Hmm well debated :doh:
08-06-2011, 01:49 PM
AKBapologist

Quote:

Originally Posted by Terry Tuffnutz

so you want someone to come in, pay off all the debts and spend big too? it won't happen given the way we've financed the stadium.

we've got two huge potential investors but they won't spend big or pay off the debts as they can watch their share value rise and as the debt falls. every investor wants a significant return at any club

Abramovich has spunked +700mill into chelsea, City around 500mill they won't be getting that back in there life time (unless they ruined there clubs) even if they decided to stop spending tomorrow - which they won't.
08-06-2011, 01:50 PM
Power n Glory

Wenger wouldn't be able to cope with the type of problems Mancini and Ancelotti had. He wouldn't be able to manage the big egos and wouldn't accept the owner interfering with his work. A Sugar Daddy would be like handing the guy a rope to hang himself with. It's a silly thread and hasn't really been thought through.
08-06-2011, 01:50 PM
Xhaka Can’t

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKBapologist

And if we had an owner who didn't put up with that crap and demanded more, he's be gone. Why are you making this false argument, regurgitating GB's point about how this is all the managers fault?

Stop confusing the voices in your head with the point I've been clearly making.

It's starting to piss me off.
08-06-2011, 01:51 PM
AKBapologist

Quote:

Originally Posted by Punchinello Beezo

You think that "marquee" players such as Yaya Toure should be on that amount? Then i am even more glad we dont have someone at the top sanctioning such moves and a manager who can keep us in the top 4 without joining such stupidity.

Ok, so now AW is a hero. Make up your minds. Are you happy with CL qualification or do you want to win stuff?

Totally mental.
08-06-2011, 01:52 PM
AKBapologist

Quote:

Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory

Wenger wouldn't be able to cope with the type of problems Mancini and Ancelotti had. He wouldn't be able to manage the big egos and wouldn't accept the owner interfering with his work. A Sugar Daddy would be like handing the guy a rope to hang himself with. It's a silly thread and hasn't really been thought through.

Where did I say I didn't want the manager to be changed?
08-06-2011, 01:54 PM
AKBapologist

Quote:

Originally Posted by Punchinello Beezo

You think that "marquee" players such as Yaya Toure should be on that amount? Then i am even more glad we dont have someone at the top sanctioning such moves and a manager who can keep us in the top 4 without joining such stupidity.

I'm not a free market fundimentalist, but I have to accept that this is the system that the football is based around. A player is worth however much a team wants to pay for him. Given teams are paying a certain amount, the question of "should" is irrelevant or at best, philosophical.
08-06-2011, 01:55 PM
Kano

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKBapologist

Abramovich has spunked +700mill into chelsea, City around 500mill they won't be getting that back in there life time even if they decided to stop spending tomorrow - which they won't.

this is abramovichs hobby, a personal fantasy to win the cl and live out his dream. he turned his debt into equity which will probably mean clawing that back through dividends and capital gains

and the city situation is completely unique to anyone else, pretty much in any sport.
08-06-2011, 01:56 PM
budesonide

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKBapologist

You certainly need an owner to change manager, so please sit down and shut up.

Eh?

why then have we got a board of directors? So companies without a single wealthy owner cannot tell their lower management to shape up or gtfo?
08-06-2011, 01:57 PM
budesonide

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKBapologist

Where did I say I didn't want the manager to be changed?

Here;

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKBapologist

You certainly need an owner to change manager, so please sit down and shut up.
08-06-2011, 01:59 PM
LDG

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKBapologist

The going rates for marquee players in this league is about 200k-250k per week.

And LOL at LDG using the most overrated players in the league as an argument for anything.

Well what is your argument??? You haven't actually put one accross. You've just said we need a sugar daddy. And used Yaya Toure as an example.

You forget that in City's sugar daddy time, they have also bought absolute dogshite players for extortionate amounts, who have done jack shit for them.

We stuffed city at their gaff. And were all over them at ours. So why is it that they finished above us?? It certainly wasn't about money....it wasn't that their team had more quality...it was because we tripped over our arse, capitulated as per normal, and threw away needless points.

EVERYONE on this thread is saying the same thing to you. Whilst we could use some cash being spent in the RIGHT areas, we don't NEED to lavishly spend 250mil.

What we NEED, is for our manager to wake up and smell the fucking stink he has created, and rectify it.

We all KNOW Wenger is a decent manager. But we KNOW he has been given leave to try and build a team from scratch partly out of necessity, but also with good intention. Now that it has been proved over the last three years that it hasn't worked, he is being asked to sort the fucker out.

Practically no gooner wants our club to be fake. They just want their manager to get his head out of his fucking arse. Money has nothing to do with it.
08-06-2011, 02:02 PM
AKBapologist

Quote:

Originally Posted by budesonide

Eh?

why then have we got a board of directors? So companies without a single wealthy owner cannot tell their lower management to shape up?

Our board of directors are too busy selling out to Kronke and telling the fans that there either stupid or ungrateful. What are they doing to do anything about "lower management?"
08-06-2011, 02:03 PM
Power n Glory

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKBapologist

Where did I say I didn't want the manager to be changed?

So you want a change in ownership and manager? Cool.

We have a change in ownership. He just won't be a sugar daddy and we don't need that. The new rules that come into play won't allow us to spend beyond our means anyway. So that kills that idea.
08-06-2011, 02:06 PM
AKBapologist

Quote:

Originally Posted by budesonide

Here;

Because saying that you need an owner to change the manager means I didn't want the manager to change.

OK. I guess I've just got to accept the caliblire of people I'm dealing with here... /o\
08-06-2011, 02:07 PM
Flavs

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKBapologist

I'm not a free market fundimentalist, but I have to accept that this is the system that the football is based around. A player is worth however much a team wants to pay for him. Given teams are paying a certain amount, the question of "should" is irrelevant or at best, philosophical.

but you think Yaya is a marquee player and because his wages are £200k a week that is what similar players should be on? I would say that Parker is not ony a better player but had a better season despite being in the shower of shit that is west ham and yet you mock LDG above for using him as an example?

In fact we are very like man city in that we have a large portion of players who dont pull their weight and get paid irrelevant wages, we also have a manager who is under increasing pressure for his job and has lost a certain percentage of his players. The difference is we arent getting taken from behind by an arab and we dont have to pt up with teh likes of Tevez, Balotelli, Bellamy, Santa Cruz, Adebayor and so on being on £150k a week.
08-06-2011, 02:08 PM
LDG

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKBapologist

Because saying that you need an owner to change the manager means I didn't want the manager to change.

OK. I guess I've just got to accept the caliblire of people I'm dealing with here... /o\

As I, like everyone else, is so obviously thick and can't come up with an argument, I guess that gives me free reign to go for the juvenile option.

Shut up you fucking dick.
08-06-2011, 02:08 PM
AKBapologist

Quote:

Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory

So you want a change in ownership and manager? Cool.

We have a change in ownership. He just won't be a sugar daddy and we don't need that. The new rules that come into play won't allow us to spend beyond our means anyway. So that kills that idea.

My bet is on that fair play ruling being totally ignored, especially by the Spanish clubs.

Also, having a passive owner kinda kills the idea of anything else happening with our club on the pitch anyway.
08-06-2011, 02:16 PM
Flavs

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKBapologist

My bet is on that fair play ruling being totally ignored, especially by the Spanish clubs.

Also, having a passive owner kinda kills the idea of anything else happening with our club on the pitch anyway.

Nope because its run by UEFA not the individual FA's so after the 3 phase impelmentation it will become binding and anyone who doesnt comply is fined and docked 10 points. Basically Chelsea, Man city and Manpoo have a year to pay off all their debts or at least enugh that the repayment costs are covered by income.
08-06-2011, 02:17 PM
Power n Glory

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKBapologist

My bet is on that fair play ruling being totally ignored, especially by the Spanish clubs.

That's assured me. You've got my vote! :good:
08-06-2011, 02:21 PM
AKBapologist

Quote:

Originally Posted by Punchinello Beezo

Nope because its run by UEFA not the individual FA's so after the 3 phase impelmentation it will become binding and anyone who doesnt comply is fined and docked 10 points. Basically Chelsea, Man city and Manpoo have a year to pay off all their debts or at least enugh that the repayment costs are covered by income.

Chelsea and City can just write down there debts if necessary, Barca and Real will carry on as per usual. United are still so much further ahead of us in terms of revenue generated that we'll never catch up. Even if the FFA works, that's exactly when those teams will do all the investment in infrastructure that we're now currently paying for, catching up to our level in that regard in less time whilst having a decent run of successes. I honestly see us fighting for scraps between Liverpool, City, and United - especially if AW is as bad a manager as we all currently believe him to be.
08-06-2011, 02:26 PM
Flavs

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKBapologist

Chelsea and City can just write down there debts if necessary, Barca and Real will carry on as per usual. United are still so much further ahead of us in terms of revenue generated that we'll never catch up. Even if the FFA works, that's exactly when those teams will do all the investment in infrastructure that we're now currently paying for, catching up to our level in that regard in less time whilst having a decent run of successes. I honestly see us fighting for scraps between Liverpool, City, and United - especially if AW is as bad a manager as we all currently believe him to be.

yes chelsea and city can write off debt this year but teh rules prevent that from 2012 onwards, Manyoo are lucky in the amountof revenue they bring in but are still some £400mil in debt and will struggle to shift that after this year is done.

Real are the same as manyoo but with less debt, currently Barca are fooked and i dont think its a surprise they have sigend a commercial sponsorhip this season instead of their UNICEF sponsor.

Seriously next summer will be dull as hell cos there wont be any huge deals as clubs just cant justify the spend against income. No-one is saying they cant have debt put you have to pay it off rather than just letting it continue endlessly
08-06-2011, 02:29 PM
Marc Overmars

The way I see it is that it's almost irrelevant what our rivals do because we consistently make basic errors and show a worrying lack of a composure when dealing with pressure, it's been going on for many years and that is why I put the blame right at Wenger's door. He has his hands burnt every year by the players he's invested so much time and faith in, yet almost without fail, he overlooks the glaring problems and thinks their "spirit, maturity, character" etc will carry them through. He's a soft touch and I bet most of his players don't give a fuck about the purist ideology he tries to force on them.

This is why I don't take any notice of what others do. City and Chelsea can go and spend whatever they like, yet I guarantee we will match them blow for blow next season until we lose our bottle because the manager is not strong enough to get a reaction out of his players.

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page